batch_get_hazard_skin_eye

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the batch/multiple-chemicals scope, but does not describe error handling for invalid or missing DTXSIDs or rate limits. Given the annotations, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, with no redundant or filler text. Appropriate for a simple retrieval tool.

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 an output schema, full parameter descriptions, rich annotations, and low complexity, the description is largely complete. It could mention the singular alternative more explicitly, but an agent has enough to select and invoke this batch endpoint.

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% and the single dtxsids parameter is documented as an array of chemical identifiers. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so 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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('skin and eye hazard data') with batch scope ('multiple chemicals'). The 'batch_' prefix and plural scope distinguish it from the singular sibling get_hazard_skin_eye.

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 use for multiple chemicals at once, but does not explicitly state when to choose this over the singular sibling or any prerequisites. Usage is implied by the batch scope, not guided by alternatives or exclusions.

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