products_batch_read

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral context. It mentions retrieving records but doesn't disclose important traits like whether this is a read-only operation (implied by 'read'), what happens with invalid IDs, rate limits, authentication requirements, or response format. The description adds some value by mentioning the 'idProperty' alternative, but overall behavioral disclosure is inadequate.

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 reasonably concise with two sentences, but the second sentence is somewhat redundant with the first (both mention retrieving by unique values). The structure could be improved by front-loading the core purpose more clearly and eliminating repetition.

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 batch read tool with 4 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain parameter interactions, expected response format, error conditions, or how this differs from similar sibling tools. The description leaves too many contextual gaps for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 for 4 parameters, the description must compensate but only partially does so. It explains that 'idProperty' allows retrieval by custom unique values, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, it doesn't explain the purpose of 'propertiesWithHistory', 'productIds', or 'properties' parameters, leaving three of four parameters with unclear 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 clearly states the tool reads a batch of products using internal IDs or unique property values, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'products_read' (singular read) or 'products_list' (list all), which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'products_read' (singular), 'products_list' (list all), or 'products_search' (search with criteria). It mentions the 'idProperty' parameter but doesn't explain when to use that versus 'productIds'.

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