delegate_batch

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

Annotations already establish this is not read-only and not destructive, and the description adds that it 'queues' tasks, which implies a non-destructive write. However, it leaves key behaviors undisclosed, such as what happens when the configured limit is exceeded, whether the operation is atomic, and how errors are surfaced.

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 with no redundant content. It efficiently communicates the core action and a key constraint ('up to the configured limit').

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?

For a batch mutation tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description is too sparse. It omits return behavior, error handling, limit semantics, and any relationship to the decomposition process, leaving the agent to guess important operational details.

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?

The schema provides no descriptions for the 'tasks' parameter, and the description does not compensate by explaining the structure or expected contents of each task object. Saying 'already-decomposed worker tasks' offers vague context but not enough to understand what fields or format the tasks require.

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 queues worker tasks, using a specific verb ('Queue') and resource ('decomposed worker tasks'). It hints at a batch context via the name and differentiates from the sibling delegate_task by implying a multi-task operation, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delegate_task. The phrase 'already-decomposed worker tasks' implies a prerequisite, but there are no exclusions, alternatives, or contextual cues to help the agent choose appropriately.

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