hcm_bulk_bp_dry_run

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

The description explicitly discloses that no execution occurs and that planned actions are returned, which adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not detail the structure of the planned actions, but the core no-side-effect behavior is clearly communicated.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence conveys the operation, target resource, and key behavioral promise without filler. Every part of the description earns its place.

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 is simple and the schema covers the required parameters, but with no output schema the description only vaguely says 'planned actions' without indicating what the response looks like. It is adequate for making a basic call but leaves some uncertainty about the return format.

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 description maps 'notification ids' to notificationIds and 'approve/deny' to action, but it omits the REJECT enum value and does not explain the distinction between REJECT and DENY. With 0% schema description coverage, more parameter clarification would be needed to fully compensate.

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 a dry-run bulk approve/deny operation on notification IDs and explicitly says it returns planned actions without executing. This differentiates it from executing siblings like hcm_bulk_approve_notifications and hcm_bulk_deny_notifications.

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 word 'dry-run' and 'without executing' imply a preview use case, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus the executing bulk-action siblings, nor does it name alternatives. Usage guidance is present only by implication.

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