zetrix_multi_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Execute multiple API queries simultaneously', implying a write or action operation, but doesn't specify if it's read-only, destructive, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output looks like. For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency about its behavior and constraints.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero waste: 'Execute multiple API queries simultaneously'. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's apparent complexity, making it easy to parse without unnecessary details.

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 complexity of executing multiple queries, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on query format, error handling, concurrency limits, or return values, which are crucial for an agent to use this tool effectively. The description doesn't compensate for the missing structured data, leaving significant gaps.

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% description coverage, with the 'items' parameter documented as 'Array of query objects'. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond this, such as the structure of query objects or examples. Since the schema does the heavy lifting, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

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 'Execute multiple API queries simultaneously' states a clear verb ('Execute') and resource ('multiple API queries'), but it's vague about what type of queries these are (e.g., blockchain-related vs. general) and doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'zetrix_call_contract' or 'zetrix_sdk_call_contract' that might handle similar operations. It provides a basic purpose but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention any prerequisites, context (e.g., for batch operations), or exclusions, leaving it unclear compared to single-query siblings like 'zetrix_get_account' or 'zetrix_get_transaction'. This lack of usage context makes it harder for an agent to select appropriately.

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