Пакетное обновление

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

Annotations already indicate non-destructive, non-read-only, idempotent, and open-world behavior. The description adds 'only OData v4', automatic lookup resolution, and continue_on_error support, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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?

The description is three concise sentences with no extraneous information. It front-loads the main purpose and includes key features efficiently.

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?

The description covers batch operation, OData v4 restriction, automatic lookup resolution, and continue_on_error. It does not address error handling details or return format, but given the presence of continue_on_error and no output schema, it is reasonably complete.

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 67% with descriptions for updates and continue_on_error. The description additionally explains that lookup fields are resolved automatically, adding meaning to the data parameter. However, the collection parameter remains undescribed.

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 it updates multiple records in one batch using OData v4, with automatic lookup resolution and continue_on_error support. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bpm_update_record (single update) and bpm_batch_create/bpm_batch_delete.

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 implies use for batch updates but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like bpm_update_record or other batch tools. It only mentions OData v4 constraint, lacking when-not or alternative guidance.

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