create-cards-bulk

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the batching behavior (one request regardless of batch size) and the media constraint, which is genuinely useful. However, it omits batch failure semantics — whether the whole batch is atomic or partially applied if one note is invalid — which matters for a write operation.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose, batching rationale, and limitation with alternative routing. The core purpose is front-loaded 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 2-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, usage, and exclusions well. Minor gaps remain: no mention of return value/behavior since no output schema exists, and no statement about partial-failure handling in a batch. These are small against the otherwise complete picture.

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% and the parameter descriptions are rich (tags constraints, deck nesting, prerequisite to create-deck first). The tool description itself adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies — the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb-resource pair ('Create multiple basic notes in a single call') and pins down the note type ('basic'), distinguishing it from cloze siblings like create-cloze-cards-bulk. It also differentiates from create-card by explicitly addressing the media limitation.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use directive ('Use this instead of calling create-card repeatedly') with the underlying reason (single request vs many). It also gives an explicit when-not-to-use rule ('Does not support images or audio: use create-card') that routes the agent to the correct alternative.

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