grab_queue_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clarifies that the action is a forced import rather than a simple removal or status check, which is useful. It does not disclose side effects, failure behavior, permissions, or whether queue items are removed after import, but the core behavior is adequately conveyed.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose, scope, and target.

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, single-parameter tool with no output schema and no nested objects, the description covers the essential action and target. It is slightly thin on side effects and alternatives, but the tool is simple enough that an agent can call it correctly based on the given text and schema.

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 only parameter, ids, is fully described in the schema as 'Queue item ids'. The description reinforces that multiple items are expected, but adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, which is already complete.

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 uses a specific verb phrase ('Force import'), identifies the resource ('stuck queue items'), and specifies the scope ('several at once'). This clearly differentiates it from the singular sibling tool grab_queue_item, so an agent can understand this is the batch variant.

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 implies usage for multiple stuck queue items in need of forced import, and the plural wording suggests it is the batch counterpart to grab_queue_item. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as remove_queue_items or grab_queue_item.

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