finding_ack_batch

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

Description provides behavioral details beyond annotations: it is a mutation (consistent with readOnlyHint=false), it emits one telemetry event per successful row, and it shares batch-level defaults. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences covering definition, use case, and side effects. No redundant information; each sentence adds unique value. Front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 gives essential context: batch operation, defaults, use case, and telemetry. With an output schema present, return values are covered externally. However, it does not mention error handling behavior (continueOnError parameter) or row structure details, leaving some gaps for a tool with 12 parameters and nested rows.

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 description lists the default parameters that can be shared across rows (category, subjectKind, status, reason, etc.), adding meaning beyond the schema which has 0% description coverage. However, it does not explain all parameters (e.g., projectId, projectRef, preview, continueOnError, row fields like label, filePath, fingerprint). The baseline is 3 due to low coverage, and description partially compensates but not fully.

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?

Description clearly states it's a mutation batch for finding acknowledgements, appending multiple rows with batch-level defaults. It identifies the specific resource (finding_acks) and verb (batch append), and distinguishes itself from the singular 'finding_ack' sibling by emphasizing batch operation and defaults.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use when a scan returns many reviewed false positives or accepted tradeoffs.' It implies this is the batch alternative to the singular 'finding_ack', but does not explicitly mention when not to use or list alternative tools.

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