eds_da_push

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: discloses the bulk nature, dryRun as no-write preview, withUndo as reversible, return of an undo object, and auth token requirement. Missing details on partial failures and response format, but core safety and reversibility are covered.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value: bulk operation, dryRun recommendation, withUndo behavior, and auth requirement. No filler.

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 complex write tool with no output schema, the description covers key invocation aspects (documents, dryRun, withUndo, token). Lacks details on response shape or error/partial-failure behavior, but is sufficient for an agent to select and call it correctly in most cases.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining dryRun as a safe preview and withUndo as enabling rollback via eds_da_rollback, which adds practical semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Bulk-push many edited Document Authoring documents back in one call.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings (e.g., eds_da_put_source for single source, eds_bulk_publish) by explicitly focusing on bulk push of edited DA documents.

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?

Provides clear guidance on using dryRun first as a safe preview and withUndo for reversibility, plus the token requirement. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools (e.g., when to use eds_da_put_source instead).

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