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

Annotations provide no safety hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). Description adds billing info (each item billed individually, batching doesn't bypass limit), authentication requirement, and that anonymous calls are not supported. No contradictions.

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?

Description is well-structured: front-loads the core purpose, then covers billing, limits, and auth in separate sentences. No unnecessary words; every sentence earns its place.

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?

With a simple input schema (1 parameter, no output schema) and minimal annotations, the description provides all necessary context: purpose, usage guidelines, behavioral traits (billing, auth), and constraints. No gaps.

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 schema already describes the texts parameter. Description adds practical details: each item processed separately, max 10 items, 64k chars per item. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 it runs the same 3-layer citation verification as verify_citation across multiple texts in a single call, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like verify_citation by focusing on batching.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (multiple texts in one call) and when not (anonymous batch not supported, use verify_citation for anonymous single-text checks). Provides limits (max 10 items, 64k chars per item) and auth requirement.

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