bulk_set_visual_format

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 key behavioral trait of partial failure: 'per-item failures reported, the rest still apply' and mentions the result shape ('One result row per target'). It doesn't cover permissions or rate limits, but the essential behavior is well explained.

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 dense but efficient: it front-loads the purpose, then elaborates on input format and error-handling behavior. Three sentences cover all necessary information without repetition.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description provides sufficient context: purpose, input format, partial-failure semantics, and result row behavior. It doesn't mention limits or prerequisites beyond reportSessionId, but the essentials are covered.

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 schema provides descriptions for items (50% coverage), and the description adds deeper structure for items (JSON array with page/visual/format and vcObjects/objects sub-fields). reportSessionId is left to schema, but it's self-explanatory. The added detail for items compensates for the schema's brevity.

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 immediately specifies 'BATCH set_visual_format' with the clear action 'apply formatting to MANY visuals in one call', naming both the resource (visuals) and the scope (many). It distinguishes itself from sibling set_visual_format by emphasizing batch operation and per-item failure handling.

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?

It explicitly references set_visual_format by stating the format takes its exact formatJson shape, which implies set_visual_format as the single-item alternative. The phrase 'in one call' and 'MANY visuals' provides clear context for when to use this tool, though it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it.

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