emails_batch_update

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 'update' implies mutation, the description doesn't mention required permissions, whether updates are atomic/partial, rate limits, error handling for partial failures, or what happens to unspecified properties. It lacks crucial context for a batch mutation operation.

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 a single, efficient sentence that states the core functionality without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward batch operation and front-loads the essential 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?

For a batch mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't address behavioral aspects like permissions, atomicity, or error handling, nor does it explain parameter semantics. The tool's complexity demands more complete guidance than provided.

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. It mentions 'multiple email records' which hints at the 'inputs' array parameter, but doesn't explain the structure of individual update objects, the meaning of 'id' and 'properties', or the specific email fields that can be updated. The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema.

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 verb ('update') and resource ('multiple email records'), and specifies the operational context ('in a single request'). However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from its sibling 'emails_update' (singular) or other batch operations like 'emails_batch_create' or 'emails_batch_archive' beyond the 'update' action.

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 tool versus alternatives like 'emails_update' (singular update) or other batch operations. It mentions 'multiple email records' which implies batch processing, but doesn't specify thresholds, prerequisites, or when batch updating is preferred over individual updates.

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