delegate_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only reveals that multiple sub-agents run in parallel, but omits any details about side effects, permission requirements, concurrency limits, error handling, or the operational impact of the sub-agents themselves. Given the parameters for sandbox_mode and approval_policy, this is a significant transparency gap.

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, compact sentence: 'Run multiple sub-agents in parallel.' It is front-loaded with the action verb and resource, contains no extraneous words, and every word adds meaning. This is ideal conciseness.

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 tool has 8 parameters, two enums, no annotations, and no output schema, making it a complex tool. Yet the description provides only the core action. It omits critical operational context such as how tasks are distributed, what the return value is, what permissions are needed, and how the sandbox_mode and approval_policy affect execution. This is grossly insufficient for an AI agent to reliably invoke the 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 8 parameters. The phrase 'multiple sub-agents' hints at batch behavior but provides no information about required fields like 'agent' and 'task' or optional ones like 'persona' and 'profile'. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 tool's function with a specific verb 'Run' followed by the resource 'multiple sub-agents' and the scope 'in parallel'. This fully distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'delegate', which likely runs a single agent, and from list/validate tools. It immediately conveys what the tool does.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when you need to run multiple sub-agents concurrently. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the name 'delegate_batch' and the phrase 'multiple sub-agents' imply it is the batch variant of 'delegate'. This is clear context without exclusions.

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