batch_resolve

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

Annotations already mark it as read-only and open-world. The description adds behavioral traits: shared transport reuse (implying network efficiency) and optional cross-host concurrency. No mention of rate limits or side effects, but these are adequately covered by 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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with action, no superfluous words. Every phrase (shared transport reuse, optional cross-host concurrency) adds value.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema exists), the description covers the key aspects. It doesn't mention max/min items (in schema) or error conditions, but these are reasonable omissions for this complexity level.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that queries can be DOIs, URLs, or titles, and that concurrency is optional and cross-host. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema (array of strings, integer).

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 resolves multiple DOI, URL, or title queries with specific optimizations (shared transport reuse, concurrency). It differentiates from siblings like resolve_paper (single) and batch_fetch (likely fetches full text) by emphasizing batch resolution of identifiers.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like fetch_paper or batch_fetch. It does not mention that single queries should be handled by resolve_paper, or that batch_fetch is for fetching full text. The agent must infer usage context.

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