set_multiple_text_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions 'parallelly', indicating execution in parallel, but it does not state whether the operation overwrites existing content, requires specific permissions, or is atomic. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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 sentence with no waste, clearly stating the action and scope. It is front-loaded and effectively conveys the core purpose in a concise manner.

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?

The tool has a simple schema with full parameter coverage, but the description lacks context about the container node's relationship to the text nodes, and there is no output schema or annotations to enrich understanding. It is adequate for a straightforward batch operation but leaves gaps in behavioral context.

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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (nodeId and text). The description adds no extra meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: to set multiple text contents. The verb 'set' is specific, and the resource is 'multiple text contents' with a scope of 'in a node'. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool set_text_content by explicitly indicating it handles multiple items.

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?

Usage is implied through the plural 'multiple', suggesting it is meant for batch operations, but no explicit guidance or alternatives are mentioned. The description does not state when to use this versus set_text_content, nor does it provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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