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

The description explicitly flags the action as destructive and state-changing, detailing what happens: bulk apply updates multiple Space documents, and bulk discard removes suggestions after authorization. This goes beyond the annotations by explaining specific effects.

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, with the main purpose front-loaded in the first sentence. It packs essential information (destructive nature, prerequisites) into a short, well-structured text without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature and lack of output schema, the description provides enough context about its operation and requirements. It does not mention result reporting or atomicity, but this is not essential for basic usage.

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?

Both parameters are clearly described: 'ids' as numeric suggestion IDs, and 'action' as the operation to perform (apply or discard). The descriptions align with the schema and cover all required parameters.

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 tool's purpose: applying or discarding multiple suggestions at once, identifying the specific resource (Autopilot/repository-sync suggestions) and the action. It distinguishes itself from single-suggestion tools by emphasizing 'multiple' and 'at once'.

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 specifies when to use the tool (for multiple suggestions) and provides important prerequisites (IDs from list-space-suggestions, Enterprise access for bulk apply). It does not explicitly name the alternative single-suggestion tools, but the context implies them.

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