unassign_issue_from_user

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

The description discloses the core behavior (unassigns and uses default session) but lacks information on required permissions, reversibility, or side effects. With no annotations, transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences. It is front-loaded with the main action and adds a specific detail about session handling without any superfluous words.

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 simple tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and a notable detail (session default). It does not mention errors or prerequisites, but is sufficient for the straightforward operation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds context for session_id (default session behavior) but does not elaborate on issue_id. This partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions, but not fully.

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 verb 'Unassigns' and the resource 'issue', and specifies the effect of setting assigned user to null. It distinguishes from sibling tools like unassign_epic_from_user by focusing on issue.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like unassign_epic_from_user. It only describes the action and session handling, leaving usage guidance implied by the tool name.

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