bulk_close_drp_alerts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is entirely responsible for disclosing behavior. It fails to state what 'closing' an alert entails, whether a comment is added (the example includes a 'comment' field), any side effects, or required permissions. The only behavioral hint is the tool name itself, which is insufficient.

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 very brief and structurally clean, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. The phrase 'mutation bulkCloseDrpAlerts' is redundant with the tool name, and the example JSON consumes space without conveying purpose. It omits essential information, making it poorly sized for the agent's needs.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a nested input type, the description needed to explain behavior, input semantics, and expected results. It does none of this. The description is a stub that leaves the agent with only the name and an example, which is inadequate for reliable invocation.

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?

The input schema describes customer_slug but only references a GraphQL type for 'input', offering little semantic meaning. The description's example adds concrete fields (drpAlertIds and comment), which is helpful for understanding the expected structure. However, it does not explain what these fields do or their constraints, so it only partially compensates for the schema's opacity.

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 simply states 'mutation bulkCloseDrpAlerts', which is essentially the camelCase version of the tool name. It does not explicitly say the tool closes DRP alerts in bulk, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like bulk_update_drp_alert_state or bulk_add_drp_alert_comment. The example variables hint at the input shape but do not clarify the core action.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no explanation of whether it's intended for closing multiple alerts as opposed to using individual alert updates or bulk state changes. The description provides no contextual or exclusionary information to aid decision-making.

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