tool_batch

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

Adds detailed behavioral context beyond annotations: returns labeled sub-results with per-op duration, overrides projectId, and defensively rejects mutation/recursion. 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?

Information is front-loaded and each sentence adds value, but could be slightly more concise. Overall efficient for the complexity.

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?

Covers purpose, batching mechanics, result modes, and project override. Missing details on continueOnError and maxOps, but given output schema exists, completeness is adequate.

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?

Adds meaning to parameters like verbosity, resultMode, and project override behavior. However, does not cover continueOnError or maxOps explicitly. With 0% schema coverage, description compensates partially 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?

Clearly states it is a 'Read-only batching wrapper for independent Mako lookups' and explicitly mentions reducing round-trips after context_packet, distinguishing it from other tools.

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 advises to use after context_packet, describes verbosity options, and states that mutation tools and recursive calls are rejected, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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