Get multiple work items

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

Adds valuable behavior beyond the readOnlyHint/idempotentHint annotations: chunking by 200 ids and partial failure reporting via the 'failed' field. This gives the agent realistic expectations about batch limits and error behavior.

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 two concise sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and technical details following. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no filler.

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 rich schema and safety annotations, the description provides the key behavioral details: API name, chunk size, and partial-failure semantics. It doesn't describe the return shape, but no output schema exists and the description is otherwise sufficient to call correctly.

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%, so the baseline 3 applies. The description mentions errorPolicy=omit, but this is already encoded in the schema; it adds no new meaning beyond what the parameter descriptions provide.

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?

States a specific verb ('Read'), resource ('work items'), and scope ('many in one call'), using the workitemsbatch API. This clearly distinguishes the tool from the singular 'get_work_item' sibling without ambiguity.

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 'many work items in one call' clearly signals the intended use case over fetching items individually. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is sufficient for an agent to pick the right tool.

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