Preview Mogrt Batch

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description's bar is lower, but it adds concrete behavioral guarantees: no Adobe contact and no composition/file creation. It also caps the operation at 20 recipes, which is useful operational context. The only slight gap is that the required output_directory's 'artifact' wording is not reconciled with 'does not create any files.'

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?

Two short sentences capture the operation, its input, and its side-effect profile, with the core capability front-loaded. Every clause earns its place; there is no filler or restatement of the title.

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?

With annotations and a rich schema, the description is mostly sufficient: it clarifies read-only behavior, boundary, and input types. It loses a point because the description's 'does not create any files' sits uneasily with the schema's output_directory description ('directory for every batch artifact'), leaving an agent uncertain whether artifacts are produced. It also provides no explicit routing to sibling preview/create tools.

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?

Input schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents data_file_path, output_directory, approved_workspace_path, and brand_kit. The description adds the 'up to 20' boundary and reaffirms the JSON/CSV source, but it doesn't clarify brand_kit or output_directory beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('Preview'), a precise resource ('MOGRT recipe exports'), and a concrete scope ('up to 20 bounded' from a JSON or CSV data file). It also states what it does not do ('does not contact Adobe or create any compositions or files'), which separates it from export/creation siblings like create_mogrt_batch and preview_mogrt_recipe.

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 first sentence implies the intended use case: previewing multiple MOGRT recipes from a data file. However, it never explicitly says when to choose this tool over preview_mogrt_recipe or create_mogrt_batch, nor does it mention exclusions like 'use the singular preview for one recipe'.

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