erinys_batch_save

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden for safety and side effects. It only states 'automatic similarity linking,' which hints at behavior but does not disclose whether this is a mutating operation, how links are formed, or what happens on partial failure. This is insufficient for a bulk write tool.

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 conveys the core purpose without any filler. Every word 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?

Given the complexity of a batch operation and the absence of annotations, this description is too thin. It lacks details about atomicity, failure handling, item schema, and the linking algorithm. The presence of an output schema covers return values, but the behavioral and error semantics are absent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It clarifies that 'items' are observations and 'auto_link' corresponds to similarity linking, giving some semantic meaning. However, it does not describe the expected structure of items or the exact behavior of auto_link beyond the name.

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 uses a specific verb ('Bulk-add') with a clear resource ('observations') and a distinguishing feature ('automatic similarity linking'), which sets it apart from siblings like erinys_save (single add) and erinys_link (manual linking). It is specific and unambiguous.

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 phrase 'Bulk-add' clearly implies this is for adding multiple observations at once, which is a distinct use case from the single-item erinys_save. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, so it stops short of being fully explicit.

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