Batch Set Schematic Property Positions

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

Annotations already flag destructive/write behavior, but the description adds useful context: 'single file read/write' clarifies the operation's scope, and 'Returns per-item applied/failed lists' discloses partial-failure behavior. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states purpose and comparative advantage; the second specifies input format and return behavior. Every clause earns its place.

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 annotations mark it as destructive and there's an output schema, the description covers what (move labels), when (when batching multiple moves), input structure, and result format ('applied/failed lists'). It is fully self-sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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?

The schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions and types, including the 'property' enum and optional angle/visible defaults. The description restates the updates object shape ('{reference, property, x, y, angle?, visible?}') but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so it sits at the 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 description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Move many Reference/Value field labels in a single file read/write', which clearly states the action and scope. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'set_schematic_property_position' by noting it is 'far faster than repeated' calls, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

Explicitly says 'far faster than repeated set_schematic_property_position calls', which names an alternative and implies when to use this batch version. While it doesn't list exclusion criteria, this direct comparison gives clear usage context.

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