Bulk ATLAS Technique Lookup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds details about response shape (status per item, error handling), case-insensitivity, normalization, deduplication, and next_calls. No contradiction.

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?

Description is single paragraph but packed with essential information. All sentences are meaningful, though slightly dense. Could be improved with bullet points.

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 bulk tool with one parameter and output schema, the description covers motivation, follow-up use case, response structure, rate limits, and per-item status. No gaps given the context.

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% with a clear description of technique_ids format. The description adds value by noting each id counts as one request toward rate limit, which is not in 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 the tool retrieves full records for up to 50 techniques in a single request, distinguishing it from the sibling atlas_technique_lookup. The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'ATLAS techniques' are specific, and the alternative use case is explicitly mentioned.

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?

Explicitly states it is the natural follow-up to atlas_case_study_lookup and implies alternative (atlas_technique_lookup for single lookups). Rate limits and per-item request counting provide clear usage context.

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