hosts_bulk_update

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 states the tool updates fields but does not explain side effects, partial-failure behavior, whether unset fields remain unchanged, idempotency, required permissions, or the response format. The replacement-endpoint note adds some historical context but not operational transparency.

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?

One efficient sentence with zero filler. The core operation and the relevant removal context are front-loaded, and there is no redundant repetition of schema information.

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 a 16-parameter bulk mutation with nested objects and no output schema, the description provides only a single line. An agent lacks guidance on partial updates, constraints, result reporting, or failure modes. The rich schema partially compensates, but the overall tool context remains under-specified.

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 schema already documents every parameter. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter usage, field interactions, or update semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Bulk update'), resource ('hosts'), and scope ('selected hosts'), and adds useful context by noting it replaces the removed set-inbound / set-port endpoints. This clearly identifies what the tool does and differentiates it from single-host or enable/disable bulk variants.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hosts_update, hosts_bulk_enable, hosts_bulk_disable, or hosts_bulk_delete. The only context is the replaced endpoint mention, which does not help an agent choose among current siblings.

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