batch_add_markers

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

The description mentions batch and auto-generation but provides no details about behavior such as whether markers overwrite existing ones, what happens if the filepath is invalid, or any side effects. Without annotations, the description should disclose more to avoid misuse.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the main purpose. However, it could be slightly improved by including brief usage context without becoming verbose.

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?

With 5 parameters (including required filepath), no output schema, and no annotation coverage, the description is too brief. It fails to explain the required filepath parameter, the output_path, or the overall workflow, making it insufficient for correct 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 input schema describes 60% of parameters (markers, auto_at_cuts, auto_at_intervals). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'cuts/intervals' which maps to schema fields. Filepath and output_path remain undocumented, so the description adds no extra value.

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 'add multiple markers at once, or auto-generate at cuts/intervals', which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'add_marker' (single) and import tools. It specifies the action (add) and resource (markers) with clear options.

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 when to use this tool (batch adds or auto-generation) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or suggest alternatives like 'add_marker' for single markers or import tools for files. This omission could lead to incorrect tool selection.

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