post_batch_delete_risks

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds valuable context beyond that: risks are 'moved to the trash' and 'can be restored later,' which materially softens the destructive framing and tells the agent the operation is recoverable.

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?

Short and front-loaded, but the opening two sentences are redundant – 'Delete multiple risks.' is immediately restated as 'Delete multiple risks at once in a single request.' The rest of the content is efficient and earns its place.

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?

For a destructive batch mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential unknowns: single-request batching and restorability via trash. Annotations carry the safety profile, so the remaining gap (no return/pagination detail) is minor.

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?

With one parameter and near-zero schema description coverage, the description does explain the payload semantics ('Specify the risk identifiers you want to delete'), mapping the body array to risk IDs. But it adds no detail on format, ID limits, or batch size constraints, so it only partially compensates.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Delete multiple risks') and emphasizes the batch semantics ('at once in a single request'), which distinguishes it from the single-item sibling delete_risk. It does not explicitly name that sibling, but the batch scope is 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?

Usage is implied by 'multiple risks at once in a single request' – an agent can infer this is the batch path versus delete_risk for singles. However, no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or alternative routing is given, leaving the choice to inference.

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