batch_update_footprints

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the batch size limit and the required 'id' field. However, it does not mention error handling, partial success, idempotency, or authentication, which are important for a batch mutation.

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 concise: a single sentence summarizing purpose and constraints, followed by clear parameter details. No wasted words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema. The description thoroughly explains the input format. However, it lacks information about return values (e.g., success/failure counts) and error behavior, which would be helpful for a batch operation.

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 coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions). The description fully compensates by detailing the JSON format, required field ('id'), and optional fields (title, description, category_ids, tag_names). This adds substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Batch update bookmarks' with constraints 'max 50 at a time' and 'For bulk reorganization.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like copy_footprint (single copy) or create_category (creation).

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 says 'For bulk reorganization,' implying when to use. It also sets a batch limit of 50. However, it does not explicitly exclude single updates or mention alternatives, though sibling tool names provide context.

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