Bulk Execute

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

With sparse annotations, the description adds valuable behavioral context: it writes snapshot+journal per router for rollback and requires two-step confirmation for destructive tools. It does not disclose idempotency or all side effects, but covers key behaviors.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. No fluff or waste.

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 tool with 6 parameters, 2 required, no output schema, and nested objects, the description covers the main points: purpose, targeting, destructive confirmation, rollback, and return format. It could mention that params are passed to the target tool, but overall it is complete enough for an agent.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema: explains targeting methods, the two-step confirmation, return structure (per-router results with counts), and that params should omit routerId. This clarifies the purpose of each parameter.

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: 'Fan out a single-router tool to many routers in parallel.' It specifies the verb (fan out) and resource (single-router tool to many routers), and distinguishes it from siblings which are single-router tools.

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 provides explicit guidance on the two-step confirmation for destructive tools and targeting by routerIds or tags. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context makes it clear that this is a bulk operation for coordinating multiple routers.

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