brc_get_nom_ac_ledger_by_ids

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It reveals that the tool makes individual GET calls per ID, indicating a read-only operation with potential performance implications. Adds value by explaining the mechanism, but does not detail error handling or merging of results.

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?

Single sentence of 16 words, front-loads the action. No unnecessary information. Extremely concise and well-structured.

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?

No output schema, so description should explain return value. It does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., array of accounts) or error behavior for invalid IDs. Adequate but missing return value details.

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 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. Description adds mechanism context (calling endpoint for each id), which is beyond schema. Provides additional meaning about how parameters are used.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'gets' and resource 'nominal accounts for specific ids', and explains the mechanism (calling GET endpoint for each ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like brc_get_nominal_account_ledger_by_id (single ID) and brc_list_nominal_accounts (all accounts).

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?

Implies usage when you have specific IDs, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. No 'when not to use' or explicit alternatives mentioned. Siblings provide context but description could be more direct.

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