batch

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds behavioral details: max 100 per batch, pricing as sum of individual endpoint prices, throughput improvement. No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. It efficiently conveys usage, constraints, and benefits without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (batching multiple computations), the description covers purpose, usage, constraints (max 100), pricing, and ideal scenarios. No output schema, but the description adequately explains return value implicitly.

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 100% (single parameter 'requests'). The description adds semantic value by explaining the structure ('array of {endpoint, params} objects') and endpoint format ('e.g., 'options/price''), which goes beyond the schema's description.

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 'Execute multiple computations in a single request,' specifying the verb (execute) and resource (multiple computations). It distinguishes from siblings which are individual endpoint tools like 'options_price' or 'risk_portfolio'.

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 explicitly says 'Use when you need to execute multiple computations efficiently' and provides context like 'bundle up to 100 calls for ~6x throughput improvement' and ideal use cases such as 'backtests, parameter sweeps, and portfolio-wide calculations.' It lacks explicit when-not-to-use but is still clear.

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