bulk_ioc_lookup

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

Description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: per-indicator source coverage, partial failure visibility via verdict fields, and auto-detection of IOC types. Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent, but description enriches with operational specifics.

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 informative and well-structured, but slightly dense with multiple details in one paragraph. Could be split into clearer sections, but no redundant sentences.

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 one parameter, annotations, and output schema, the description covers purpose, usage guidance, rate limits, behavior (source coverage, partial failures), and sibling differentiation. Fully complete.

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 covers 100% of parameters, but description adds critical context: maximum 50 per call, auto-detection of type, and per-type source coverage. This goes beyond the schema description.

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 it batch queries multiple IOCs (IP/domain/URL/hash) in one request, auto-detects type, and queries abuse.ch feeds. It distinguishes from sibling ioc_lookup by noting batch vs single indicator use.

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 recommends for SOC alert triage or batch enrichment and directs to use ioc_lookup for single indicators. Also provides rate limits for Free and Pro tiers.

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