Resolve galleries from image pages in batch

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond that: it preserves input order, preserves duplicates, and reports per-entry errors. This is exactly the kind of runtime behavior an agent needs to know before calling.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core action and scope, then adds the three most consequential behavioral guarantees. There is no filler, no repetition of schema details, and every clause earns its place.

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 batch read-only resolution tool, the description together with the full schema, annotations, and output schema covers what the agent needs: input shape, bounds, ordering, duplicate handling, and error behavior. There is no major missing context.

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 parameter semantics are fully documented in the schema. The description does not need to repeat parameter details, and it correctly adds no redundant parameter information. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Resolve'), a clear resource ('image-page references to gallery tokens'), and a bounded scope ('1-500'). The word 'batch' and the preservation semantics distinguish it from the singular resolve tool, even without naming it directly.

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 makes the intended use clear: resolve multiple image-page references in one call, with explicit batch sizing and preservation of order/duplicates/errors. It does not explicitly name the singular alternative 'eh_resolve_gallery' as the other option, but the batch context and sibling list make the selection obvious.

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