bulk_add_label

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It correctly conveys that this is a mutating batch operation, but it does not mention idempotency, duplicate-label handling, partial failure behavior, or authorization requirements. The primary side effect is clear, but important behavioral details are absent.

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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and bulk scope immediately, making it easy for an agent to parse and act on.

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 simple two-parameter mutation, the description plus schema is minimally viable: the agent knows what action is performed and which parameters are required. However, with no annotations and no output schema, batch-operation context such as what happens if a label is already present, validation of labelId, and error behavior is missing.

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 100%, which sets the baseline at 3. The schema descriptions are tautological ('Parameter cardIds', 'Parameter labelId'), so the description adds little semantic depth beyond the parameter names. It does at least clarify that labels are being applied to cards.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Ajoute un label à plusieurs cartes en une fois' means 'adds a label to multiple cards at once.' The bulk scope is explicit and distinguishes it from the single-card sibling add_label_to_card.

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 bulk scope is implied by both the tool name and the phrase 'en une fois', so an agent can infer this is for labeling multiple cards in one operation. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives such as add_label_to_card or state when not to use this tool, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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