assign_leads

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description discloses side effects: Each change is recorded on the lead's timeline, and the assignee gets one aggregated notification for the whole batch. It also explains unassign behavior and the active non-viewer member requirement, with no contradiction of annotations.

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 four compact sentences with no filler; purpose, batching, assignee rules, and side effects each get exactly one sentence. It is front-loaded with the core action before constraints.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with an output schema, the description covers what, when, how, constraints, and side effects. There is no missing information an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it frames leadIds as a batch that must be passed in one call and adds assignee validity constraints and the me/null convention. This materially improves an agent's ability to set both parameters correctly.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair, Assign one or more leads of the current team to a member, or clear the assignee, which also covers the unassign case. This clearly distinguishes assign_leads from siblings like update_lead, set_lead_tags, or add_lead_comment.

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?

It gives explicit batching guidance: Pass every lead id in a single call (up to 50) — do not loop one call per lead. It also references the sibling tool for valid assignees (see list_lead_settings.assignableMembers) and specifies the me vs omit/null semantics.

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