AtlaSent — Evaluate (streamed, buffered)

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

Description adds valuable behavioral context: per-item RPC failures return {error} and stream continues, and closed-by-default 404 surfaces as feature_not_enabled error. Annotations are minimal, so description carries the burden well.

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?

Three focused sentences: purpose, error handling, special case. No wasted words, front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Covers key aspects (max items, error handling, special 404 error) and references sibling's return shape. Missing explicit return schema is offset by 'same shape' reference.

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% with clear descriptions. The description adds no further parameter details beyond 'same shape as atlasent_evaluate_many', which is implicit for the items array.

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 evaluates up to 100 actions via streaming, distinguishing itself from synchronous evaluate variants with 'streaming endpoint' and 'same shape as atlasent_evaluate_many'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this streaming version versus atlasent_evaluate or atlasent_evaluate_many. The 100-item cap is mentioned but not as a decision criterion.

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