Batch Mark Projects Reviewed

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

Describes the update effect on review status and includes return value (summary with count and errors). Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) but no destructive hint, which aligns.

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?

Very concise with clear sections (Args, Returns, Examples). First sentence is direct. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

Completeness is high given no output schema: return value described, parameter constraints spelled out, examples provided, and no missing context for a batch review operation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and description adds value by restating constraints (1-100 projects, reviewIntervalDays optional range 1-3650) and providing examples. This clarifies usage beyond schema.

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 explicitly states 'Mark multiple projects as reviewed', which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from the sibling omnifocus_mark_project_reviewed by indicating batch operation.

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?

While not explicitly stating when not to use vs single mark, the name and description imply it's for batch operations, and the sibling tool handles single projects. Could be improved with direct alternative mention.

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