batch_import

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

Annotations provide no readOnly/destructive hints, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It states the import action, the matching pattern, directory, and supported formats. However, it does not disclose side effects on the current scene, overwrite behavior, or failure handling when no files match.

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?

One concise sentence, verb-first, with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose and parameter semantics.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool does and the key input concepts. It could mention side effects or result behavior, but the core calling context is sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives partial meaning by identifying 'pattern' as a matching expression and 'directory' as the source location. It does not explain glob syntax, path expectations, or edge cases, leaving some ambiguity.

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 action ('Import'), the resource ('all files matching pattern from directory'), and the supported formats. It is immediately distinguishable from the singular io_import_file and reverse-direction batch_export.

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 clear contextual guidance: use this tool to batch-import multiple matching files from a directory. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the batch-vs-single distinction is strongly implied.

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