ibot_batch_get_chat_links

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does credibly: it discloses the internal-API transport (no browser, ~1s per contact) and the Playwright fallback, plus what the result contains (chat_id and link). It omits auth/permission needs and rate/limit behavior (the 50-item cap lives only in the schema).

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose before the transport/fallback detail and the return shape. Every sentence adds information; slight overlap between the description's device note and the schema's identical wording is the only 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?

For a batch tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the essentials: batch scope, transport and fallback, device filtering, and the shape of the return. Missing only permission requirements and the call-size ceiling, the latter covered by the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents device, archived, and contacts. The description restates the device default (IBOT_DEVICE, or all) but adds no format or edge-case semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Busca múltiplos contatos no I-Bot de uma vez') and makes the batch scope explicit, which distinguishes it from the singular sibling ibot_get_chat_link. It does not name that sibling directly, so differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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?

Implies usage via 'de uma vez' (batch) and explains the device filter defaults and the archived fallback, which is real operational context. However it never states when to prefer this over the single-contact ibot_get_chat_link or any when-not condition, so guidance remains inferred.

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