md_convert_batch

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of explaining behavior. It says files are converted and that formatting matches md_convert, but it does not disclose whether original files are modified, whether existing output files are overwritten, what naming convention is used, or what happens when conversion fails. This is a significant gap for a tool that creates or modifies files.

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 short sentences with no filler. The main action and default behavior are front-loaded, and the reference to md_convert is a compact way to inherit formatting details without duplication.

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?

Despite good parameter schema coverage, the tool has no annotations and no output schema, so the description needs to explain what a successful conversion produces, whether the operation is destructive, and how output files are named. The current description leaves these operational details to inference, making it incomplete for safe and correct 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?

The input schema documents all four parameters with clear descriptions, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds the default *.txt context but does not add meaning beyond the schema, which matches the baseline for full schema coverage.

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 states a clear action: convert all matching files in a folder to Markdown, with a default extension filter and an explicit reference to md_convert's formatting rules. This distinguishes the batch tool from the single-file sibling md_convert and makes its scope immediately understandable.

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 clearly implies this tool is for batch conversion of multiple files in a folder, in contrast to md_convert, and it signals shared behavior with md_convert. However, it never explicitly says 'use md_convert for a single file' or gives exclusion criteria, so the guidance is clear but not fully explicit.

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