Submit Activities (Bulk)

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

The description reveals important behaviors: per-item ai wholly replaces default, fail-soft execution (one failure does not abort rest), per-item outcomes in results, and guardrails at batch level. Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, which aligns with the write nature, but the description adds significant context beyond annotations.

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 compact but dense with information. It uses three sentences with clear structure: first defines the tool, second explains fail-soft and results, third covers guardrails and limits. Slightly verbose but efficient given the complexity.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, behavioral details (fail-soft, guardrails), and parameter semantics. No output schema, but mentions return of results with per-item outcomes. Could include more on error format or specific field behaviors, but adequate for the tool's complexity.

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 schema has parameter descriptions for many fields (67% coverage). The description adds meaning beyond schema: e.g., 'A per-item ai wholly replaces the top-level default (no partial merge)' and 'use clientRef to correlate' results. This enhances understanding of parameter behavior.

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 it is the 'Bulk variant of submit_activity' and describes its function: 'one module + one activity applied to many entries, each item with its own input.' It distinguishes from the sibling submit_activity by noting it is for bulk operations and uses 'Use instead of N sequential submit_activity calls.'

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: instead of N sequential calls. Also gives limitations: 'Max 100 items; chunk beyond that.' Provides clear guidance on guardrails: 'actor="human" rejects the whole batch; actor="hybrid", activity="changeStatus", or any state override requires confirmed: true.'

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