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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, the description discloses ordering ('newest first'), paging behavior, included count fields, the meaning of `total`, case-insensitive partial matching for `search`, filtering via `templateId`, and the required `batches:read` permission. These details materially improve invocation confidence for a read tool.

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 dense but front-loaded: it starts with what the tool lists and returns, then moves to filtering behavior, sibling alternatives, and the required permission. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

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 low-complexity read-only listing tool with full schema descriptions and an output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, filters, sibling alternatives, and auth requirements. Nothing essential is missing for correct selection or invocation.

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 page and limit are already well documented in the schema. The description adds semantic meaning for `search` ('matches part of a batch name, ignoring case') and `templateId` ('keeps one template's batches'), though it does not elaborate on pagination parameters 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Lists the workspace's batches'), specifies ordering and pagination, and enumerates the returned batch fields. It also distinguishes the tool from get_batch by noting that get_batch should be used for one known batch ID.

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?

It explains the tool's purpose for listing, filtering, and counting batches, and explicitly routes the agent to get_batch for a single known ID and to get_batch_jobs for job details. This is clear when-to-use and alternative guidance with no misleading exclusions.

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