bulk_grade

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses asynchronous behavior and a Progress object return, which is valuable. However, it omits details about permissions, side effects, and error handling, leaving gaps for a mutation tool.

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 two concise sentences with purpose first, then async behavior. Both sentences add critical information and there is zero wasted text.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose and async behavior but lacks guidance on when to use, prerequisites, or failure handling. It is minimally adequate but not complete for a mutating bulk 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already thoroughly documents each parameter, including acceptable score formats.

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 grades multiple students on one assignment at once, using specific verb 'Grade' and resource 'multiple students on one assignment'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like grade_submission and grade_with_rubric by emphasizing bulk 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?

The phrase 'at once' clarifies the bulk nature, implying use when grading multiple students simultaneously. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the context is clear enough relative to single-grading siblings.

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