search_batch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does reveal one key behavioral trait: 'Returns best match per query,' which informs the user of the output approach. However, it does not mention potential limitations (e.g., error handling, rate limits, ordering of results) or confirm safety (read-only implication), so there are gaps.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value. There is no fluff or repetition of schema information; it efficiently states purpose, result, and usage guidance in a compact form.

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 a single parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough context: it states the batch nature, the per-query result behavior, and a reason to use it over an alternative. It does not describe the exact structure of the returned matches, but this is not necessary for such a simple tool.

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%, with the 'queries' parameter already described as 'List of product queries (max 15).' The description adds the semantic of searching multiple products at once, but this is largely implicit in the parameter type and tool name. It does not add format details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Search' and resource 'multiple products,' clearly distinguishing itself from the sibling 'search' tool by noting it processes multiple queries at once. The phrase 'Search multiple products at once' is a clear, specific action, and 'Returns best match per query' clarifies the result.

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 explicitly says 'Use instead of calling search N times,' which directly contrasts with the alternative 'search' tool and gives clear context for when to prefer this batch version. However, it does not mention exclusions or when to use the single search tool instead, so it stops short of full 5.

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