crm_batch_read_objects

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. However, it incorrectly states a create operation, which contradicts the implied read behavior from the tool name and schema (e.g., parameters like 'objectIds' and 'properties' suggest retrieval). This misrepresentation fails to inform about safety, permissions, rate limits, or output format, leaving the agent with unreliable information.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified and misleading rather than efficiently informative. It fails to front-load critical details about the tool's true purpose, wasting the limited space on incorrect information. While brief, it does not earn its place by adding value.

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 (5 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, no output schema), the description is completely inadequate. It does not clarify the tool's purpose, usage, behavior, or parameters, and the contradiction with the tool name exacerbates the gap. For a batch operation in a CRM context, this leaves the agent without essential context to operate effectively.

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 0%, meaning no parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not compensate by explaining any parameters, such as 'objectType', 'objectIds', or 'properties', leaving all 5 parameters undocumented. This lack of semantic information hinders the agent's ability to use the tool correctly, especially with complex enums and arrays.

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 'Create multiple CRM objects in a single request' is misleading and contradicts the tool's name 'crm_batch_read_objects' and input schema. The name suggests a read operation, while the description claims a create operation. This creates confusion about the tool's actual purpose, making it tautological to the incorrect action rather than clarifying the intended functionality.

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. Given the sibling tools include both batch read (e.g., 'crm_batch_read_objects' should align with 'calls_batch_read', 'emails_batch_read') and batch create operations (e.g., 'crm_batch_create_objects'), the description fails to clarify its role, leading to potential misuse. It offers no context on prerequisites, constraints, or comparisons to other tools.

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