set_multiple_text_contents

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden for a write operation. It says nothing about permissions, reversibility/undo, ordering of updates, or atomicity. 'Efficiently' is a marketing adverb rather than disclosed behavior.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no preamble, which is the right size for a one-parameter tool. The trailing adverb 'efficiently' is the only filler.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain return/failure behavior for a batch mutation (e.g., partial failures, count of updated nodes). It covers none of this, nor any parameter detail, so it is incomplete for the tool's complexity.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single `updates` parameter and its nested nodeId/characters shape. It adds no meaning at all about what nodeId refers to or how characters replaces existing text, leaving the schema's bare types to do all the work.

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?

Names a specific verb (update) and resource (text nodes) with a batch scope, so an agent can tell it apart from the single-node set_text_content / figma_set_text siblings. It does not name those siblings explicitly, but 'multiple' carries the distinction.

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 word 'Batch' implies the use case (many nodes in one call), and the proximity of single-node siblings makes the alternative inferable. However, there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of whether inputs must be selected/loaded first.

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