stories-assign-current-user

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the assignment is reversible, what permissions are required, or any side effects (e.g., notifications sent). The description carries the full burden but fails to add such context.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It is efficient, but could be slightly improved by adding a bit more context without becoming verbose.

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 1-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It does not mention success/failure behavior, error conditions, or whether the current user must be a member of the story's project.

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 100% coverage and describes the single parameter 'storyPublicId' as 'Story ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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: 'Assign current user as story owner.' It uses a specific verb ('Assign') and resource ('current user as story owner'), and it distinguishes from the sibling tool 'stories-unassign-current-user' which does the opposite.

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 provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool or when to choose an alternative. The context of sibling tools implies the opposite action, but no specifics on prerequisites (e.g., user must be a project member) are given.

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