batch_update_rows

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the id field requirement and the 200-row limit, providing useful operational context. However, it does not reveal behavior on partial failure, whether updates are atomic, any authentication needs, or return values. This is acceptable but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately communicates the core action and constraint. Every word earns its place, and no redundant information is included.

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?

The tool has only two parameters and no output schema. The description clearly explains the purpose and the required item structure, which is enough for selection and basic invocation. It omits details about return values or error handling, but given the tool's simplicity and the schema's coverage, it is largely 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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes 'table_id' and 'items' with an example. The description adds a concise statement of the id requirement and allowed fields, but this mostly restates what the schema already conveys. No additional semantic depth is provided beyond the schema baseline.

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 verb ('Update'), resource ('multiple rows'), and scope ('at once'). It also specifies the batch limit (up to 200) and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'update_row' (which handles single rows) and 'batch_create_rows' (which creates rather than updates).

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 phrase 'Update multiple rows at once' implies this tool is for batch updates, contrasting with the single-row 'update_row' sibling. The limit of 200 provides a clear boundary, though no explicit alternative or exclusions are mentioned. Context is clear but lacks direct when-not-to-use guidance.

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