Batch Commands

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses the restrictive behavior (disallowed destructive commands) and format, but does not mention execution order, failure handling, partial success, or response details. This is useful but incomplete for a batch execution tool.

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 compact: two sentences covering purpose, format, and restrictions. Every sentence earns its place with no filler, and key information is front-loaded.

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 is a batch wrapper and the description provides purpose, format, and key restriction. An output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere. Missing details like ordering or failure atomicity, but overall it's sufficient for selection and basic invocation.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining the structure of the 'commands' parameter: each command is {"type": "<command_name>", "params": {...}}. It also lists disallowed command types, adding semantic meaning beyond the schema's bare array of objects.

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?

Description clearly states 'Execute multiple commands in a single round-trip', specifying the verb (execute), resource (multiple commands), and the value proposition (single round-trip). It differentiates from individual command tools by batching, and even gives the command format.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when not to use the tool: 'Destructive commands ... are not allowed in batch - use them individually.' This gives a clear exclusion and alternative. It implies usage for non-destructive multi-command scenarios, but doesn't elaborate on further use cases.

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