add_assets_to_group

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must describe behavioral traits, but it only restates the action. It does not disclose important behavior such as whether duplicates are ignored, how partial failures are handled, any permission requirements, or the operation's atomicity. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making its purpose immediately clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has only two simple parameters and no output schema, but the description is minimal. It does not explain what the operation returns, how it handles edge cases (e.g., invalid asset IDs), or any side effects. While the core action is clear, an agent may need additional information to invoke it confidently in all scenarios.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides 100% coverage, describing 'ids' as an array of asset IDs and 'asset_group_id' as the ID of a Collection or Lightbox. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so it earns the baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Add'), the resource ('multiple assets'), and the target ('a Collection or Lightbox'). It explicitly mentions 'multiple' and 'at once', which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_asset_to_collection and add_asset_to_lightbox that handle single assets.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the primary use case: adding several assets in one operation. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that an agent would infer when to use this tool versus the single-add siblings. However, no explicit when-not-to-use guidance is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.