crm_batch_create_companies

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While 'Create' implies a write/mutation operation, the description doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, whether the operation is atomic, or what happens if duplicate companies are submitted. For a batch creation tool with complex nested parameters, this is a significant gap in behavioral context.

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 extremely concise at just 6 words, front-loading the core purpose without any wasted words. Every word earns its place, though this conciseness comes at the cost of completeness for such a complex tool.

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?

For a batch creation tool with complex nested parameters (1 top-level parameter containing arrays of objects with multiple properties and associations), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this description is severely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how to handle errors, or provide any semantic context for the numerous property fields, making it insufficient for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate but fails to do so. It mentions 'multiple companies' which hints at an array structure, but doesn't explain the 'inputs' parameter, the nested 'properties' and 'associations' objects, or any of the 16+ property fields. The agent would have no semantic understanding of what data to provide beyond the bare schema structure.

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 the action ('Create multiple companies') and resource ('companies'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'crm_create_company' (single creation) or other batch creation tools like 'crm_batch_create_contacts', leaving room for confusion about when to choose this specific batch tool.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this batch creation tool versus the single-company creation tool ('crm_create_company') or other batch tools for different resources. It mentions 'in a single request' which hints at efficiency benefits, but doesn't specify scenarios like bulk imports, data migration, or performance considerations that would help an agent make the right choice.

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