Generate Uml Batch

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

Annotations already cover idempotent and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context about the return format ('list of per-index results or errors') and the optional shared output_dir. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and includes the necessary parameter and return details without any waste. Every sentence 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?

The description covers batch behavior, item structure, return type, and shared directory. There is an output schema for detailed return values, so the description need not repeat that. It could mention edge cases like empty items, but overall it's complete for a tool of this complexity.

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%, but the description compensates by outlining the item structure with fields and optionality (diagram_type, code, output_format?, theme?, scale?) and explaining that output_dir is shared for all items. This gives the agent a clear understanding of the parameters beyond bare 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 'Generate multiple diagrams in one call', using a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from the sibling tool generate_uml (single). It also mentions 'Each item is like generate_uml', reinforcing its role as the batch counterpart.

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 batch usage by framing it as 'multiple diagrams in one call' and referencing generate_uml's parameter structure. It doesn't explicitly say when to choose this over repeated calls but conveys the benefit. No explicit exclusions, but sufficient guidance for typical use.

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