Batch Update Traders

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. Description adds no behavioral context about partial failures, atomicity, or permission requirements beyond the redundant 'update' wording.

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 sentence of 11 words, front-loaded with the verb 'Update', and contains no filler or redundant information.

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?

Batch operation with a nested array parameter and no output schema. Description gives no information about response format, error handling, or partial update behavior, making it inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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% and the description does not compensate. Field names like maxCopyAmount and copyPercentage are self-explanatory only at a surface level; no meaning or usage guidance is provided for these parameters.

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 uses specific verb 'update', identifies resource 'settings across multiple followed traders', and specifies batch nature with 'in one request'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tool update_trader which handles a single trader.

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 batch usage via 'multiple followed traders' but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over update_trader or provide exclusions. Usage context is inferred rather than stated.

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