thruk_bulk_acknowledge

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose side effects, but it only states the basic action. It does not mention consequences of acknowledging (e.g., alert suppression), authorization needs, rate limits, or the scope of unhandled problems.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the complexity of the tool (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too brief. It lacks details on return values, prerequisites, and behavioral context needed for safe invocation.

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 only 20%, and the tool description adds no parameter-level information. It does not help clarify the meaning or usage of the 10 parameters beyond what the sparse schema provides.

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 action ('Acknowledge'), the resource ('every unhandled problem'), and the method ('matching the given filters in one call'). It distinguishes from the sibling thruk_acknowledge 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 description implies usage when you want to acknowledge multiple problems at once, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus thruk_acknowledge or other alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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