batch_geocode

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the transparency burden. It discloses the return format, field meanings, ordering, status values ('ok' or 'not_found'), caching benefits, plan limits, and country accuracy tip. No behavioral surprises remain.

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 compact but rich, using clear section headings (PERFORMANCE, CACHING, PLAN LIMITS, COUNTRIES, USE FOR). Every sentence adds unique value. No redundant or filler language.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity. The description covers inputs, output structure, performance, caching, plan constraints, accuracy tips, and appropriate use cases. It fully equips the agent to use the tool correctly and efficiently.

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 description adds crucial semantics: addresses parameter explicitly warns 'Deduplicate before sending' and refers to plan limits; countries parameter provides ISO examples and usage guidance ('Pass countries when all addresses are in the same country'). This goes well beyond the bare 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 'Geocode multiple addresses in a single API request.' It specifically contrasts with the sibling 'geocode' (single address) and 'batch_reverse_geocode' (reverse geocoding), making the tool's exclusive purpose unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'Always use batch_geocode for 2+ addresses. Never loop geocode calls — batch is far faster and uses fewer API credits.' Also lists specific use cases ('Importing customer lists, processing address CSV files, bulk ETL pipelines'), leaving no doubt about when to invoke this tool.

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