Batch-update Twenty CRM records

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, providing safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context beyond 'Patch all records matching a filter'. It does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., irreversible changes) or behavior with large result sets. With annotations present, the description adds marginal value.

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, compact sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and is immediately understandable.

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 complexity (5 params, 3 required, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior: it patches all matching records. The missing output format details are compensated by the 'response_format' parameter description. Annotations fill safety gaps. Slight lack of detail on error handling or partial updates, but adequate overall.

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%, but the description adds meaningful guidance: filter syntax example ('name[ilike]:...'), entity preference note, and output format recommendation. This enhances understanding beyond the schema's basic definitions, warranting above baseline.

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 title 'Batch-update Twenty CRM records' and description 'Patch all records matching a required filter in an allowed business object' clearly state the action (patch), resource (records in business object), and scope (all matching a filter). This distinguishes it from siblings like twenty_update_record (single record) and twenty_batch_create_records (create vs update).

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 implies when to use: when you need to update multiple records based on a filter. It contrasts with single-record update and batch create/delete via sibling context, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or recommend alternatives. The guidance is clear but lacks exclusion statements.

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