assign_epic_to_user

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully convey behavior. It states the action ('assigns') and a session default, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwriting existing assignments), required permissions, or idempotency. The behavioral profile is incomplete.

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?

Two brief sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the core action. Every word is necessary and efficient.

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 tool with 3 parameters and an output schema (not described), the description omits return value expectations and fails to provide enough usage or parameter context. The tool is simple but the description does not cover it fully.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'epic_id' and 'user_id' only as IDs, without explaining their meaning or constraints. It does add value for 'session_id' by noting default behavior, but overall parameter understanding relies on inference.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Assigns a specific epic to a specific user.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like assign_issue_to_user or assign_task_to_user. The action and target resources are unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., unassign_epic_from_user, or the fact that the epic and user must exist). The description lacks prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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