Batch Execute

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: operations applied in order, default fail-continue mode, and wrapping in a single undo group. It also warns against nesting batch. However, it does not describe the return format or error reporting structure.

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 three concise sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence conveys the main purpose, the second adds behavioral details, and the third provides usage context. Every sentence 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?

The description covers purpose, key behaviors, and a usage pattern, which is adequate given the tool's moderate complexity. However, it omits details about the return value structure (e.g., per-op results) and doesn't explain how errors are surfaced beyond 'recorded per op'.

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%, but the description adds valuable context by explicitly forbidding nested batch in the ops parameter, which is not in the schema. This constraint-and-context adds meaning beyond the basic parameter descriptions.

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 'Run many generic ops in one RPC', identifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool's purpose from individual operation tools by emphasizing batching, but does not explicitly contrast with specific siblings.

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 provides a concrete use case ('apply X to all matching entities' workflows) and suggests pairing with list_entities, offering clear guidance. It also notes that batch itself is not allowed inside batch, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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