File info by short codes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds a useful behavioral detail: the result set includes an unlockRequired field that must be checked prior to download. This goes beyond the structured data and provides contextual behavior, though it doesn't describe full return shape or pagination.

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 tightly written sentences: the first states the core function and scope, the second provides a critical dependency hint. Every word earns its place, and the description is front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 simplicity (one parameter), no output schema, and readOnly annotation, the description covers the essential context: batch operation, metadata lookup, and a prerequisite check. It could list more metadata fields, but for this complexity level it is sufficient.

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%: the single parameter fileCodes is fully described in the schema ('Comma-separated short codes, e.g. abc12,xyz99'). The description repeats the same info without adding new semantic depth, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 a specific verb ('lookup') and resource ('metadata by short codes'), and the batch scope distinguishes it from siblings like beecargo_list_files (which lists all files) and beecargo_get_download_url (which retrieves a URL). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 gives an explicit usage directive: check unlockRequired on each result before calling beecargo_get_download_url. This provides clear context and a workflow hint, though it doesn't explicitly exclude other alternatives or mention when not to use the tool. Still, the guidance is actionable.

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