post_insight_results

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

Annotations indicate this is a destructive write operation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true). The description adds context that it handles batch creation/updates and inline resource results. It does not contradict annotations.

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 concise (4 sentences) and front-loaded with the purpose. Each sentence serves a clear function: defining the tool, explaining batch behavior, and contrasting with siblings.

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 description adequately explains what the tool does and when to use it, but lacks information about return values (since no output schema), error handling, or size limits. For a batch mutation tool, additional context would be helpful.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, providing detailed field explanations. The description adds minimal parameter-level context beyond summarizing that insights include metadata and resource results. Therefore, it meets the baseline for well-documented schemas.

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 tool creates or updates multiple insights in a batch, and explicitly contrasts with single-insight and resource-results endpoints for granular control. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like post_insight_result and post_insight_resource_results.

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 description tells when to use this tool (batch creation/update) and when to use alternatives (single-insight or resource-results endpoints for granular control). However, it does not provide detailed context like prerequisites or limitations.

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