Bulk Create Action Plan References

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

The description discloses partial failures and the need to check item status, which adds value beyond annotations. It also mentions the HTTP 201 response. However, it does not cover authentication or rate limits, but annotations already indicate it is not read-only or destructive.

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 contains some repetition (e.g., 'Creates many Action Plans records' appears twice) and front-loads the title again. While not overly long, it could be more efficient. It earns a 3 for adequate but not exceptional conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of an output schema and the tool's complexity (3 parameters, one with enum), the description falls short. It does not explain the completion_mode parameter or the structure of plan_references. Partial failure handling is mentioned, but overall completeness is lacking.

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 has 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description lists required parameters but offers no additional meaning beyond the schema. The plan_references array is left as an opaque 'JSON request body field', and the completion_mode enum is not explained, so the description adds minimal value.

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 the tool creates action plan references in bulk, and mentions the HTTP 201 response and partial failures. However, it inconsistently refers to 'Action Plans records' instead of 'references', which could cause minor confusion. The purpose is clear but not perfectly precise.

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 says 'Use this to create many Action Plans records in a single request' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like single create or other bulk operations. No exclusions or context for selection are given.

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