batch

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

The description mentions the return value but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., file modification, overwriting, required permissions) nor any behavioral traits beyond the basic action. With no annotations, this transparency gap is significant.

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 (two sentences), well-structured, and free of unnecessary details. It efficiently communicates the core functionality without padding.

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 covers the main action and return, but lacks details about the two unexplained parameters, potential prerequisites, error conditions, or how the output summaries are structured. This leaves some gaps, though it is not overly complex.

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 explains two parameters (roster_dir and out_root) by referencing them in the action, but leaves kind and make_editable unexplained. Since the schema provides no descriptions, the description only partially compensates for the missing parameter semantics.

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's action ('Rig every PhotoshopToSpine export subfolder under roster_dir into out_root/<name>/') and its output ('Returns per-character summaries'), providing a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool over alternatives, lacks prerequisites or conditions, and does not mention any specific use cases or limitations.

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