get_section_excerpts

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral context: single index load efficiency, per-id error reporting, aggregated byte savings via _meta.tokens_saved, and truncation by design. These enrich the annotation-provided safety profile.

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 four concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence adds useful information (batch context, error handling, token savings, truncation). No redundancy or fluff.

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?

Even without an output schema, the description informs the agent of return structure (previews, inline errors, _meta.tokens_saved) and limitations (truncation). Given the read-only annotation and batch nature, this is complete and sufficient.

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 input schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (including order preservation and requested_id for correlation). The description does not add additional semantics beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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: it resolves N previews in one call, acting as a batch counterpart to get_section_excerpt. It specifies the resource (section previews) and differentiates from the singular variant and get_sections for full content.

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?

It explicitly positions itself as the batch version, and provides a clear alternative: 'read full content with get_sections.' This tells the agent when to use this tool (batch previews) and when to choose an alternative (full content needing).

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