bulk_enrich_people

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states cost and max batch size, but omits safety profile, error behavior, authentication needs, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is insufficient for a billing-related 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?

Two sentences with no fluff, front-loaded with purpose and key constraints. 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?

No output schema exists, so the description should cover return values, but does not. Given the complexity (nested parameter, billing implications), more context on errors, partial successes, and field requirements is needed for completeness.

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 low (33%), but the description adds context for the 'details' parameter by specifying it should contain identifying info (name, domain, email, linkedin_url). The boolean parameters are not explained, so the description provides partial added value.

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 explicitly states the tool enriches multiple people in a single request. It distinguishes from singletons like 'enrich_person' and other sibling tools by highlighting the batch capability and cost structure.

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 implies when to use (for batch enrichment) but does not provide explicit when-not scenarios or alternatives. It mentions max 10 people and cost per person, but lacks guidance on when to prefer this over single enrichment or search tools.

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