Resolve Statute Citations Batch

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes non-mutating behavior, so the description does not need to restate that. It adds useful context beyond the annotation: the call returns the same confirmed section, official source link, and act_id as the single-citation tool, and it is cheaper in credits and latency. Schema notes about duplicate collapsing further enrich behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The first sentence states capability and return parity; the second gives the use case and cost rationale. All information is front-loaded and relevant.

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 present, the description does not need to enumerate return fields. It covers the essential operational context: batch size, equivalence to the single tool, and the efficiency trade-off. An agent has enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already explains each parameter, including examples and the meaning of state, citations, and corpusType. The tool description adds no new parameter-level detail, but that is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Resolve up to 50 Bluebook citations in one call.' It also explicitly names the single-citation sibling and clarifies the batch variant's scope, so an agent can immediately distinguish it from resolve_statute_citation.

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 states exactly when to use the tool: 'Use when a document or answer cites several provisions.' It also explains the benefit over the alternative and names that alternative ('looping the single-citation tool'), giving clear selection guidance.

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