Bulk User Lookup

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds valuable context beyond these: the batch limit ('up to 200') and the return content ('display names and emails'). This enriches the agent's understanding of behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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 concise and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, a usage hint, and an Args block. Every sentence contributes value. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though the Args block is minimal and could be formatted more explicitly.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, read-only, no output schema), the description covers the core requirements: what it does, when to use it, the parameter format, the size limit, and the expected output fields. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 only defines 'account_ids' as an array of strings with no description. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining the parameter as 'List of Atlassian account IDs to look up (up to 200)', adding meaning about what the IDs are and the maximum count. This is helpful, though it could provide more detail about format or duplicates.

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: 'Resolve multiple Atlassian account IDs to user profiles in a single call.' This is a specific verb+resource combination, and it distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which primarily handle pages, blogposts, spaces, and comments. The purpose is unmistakable.

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 clear context: 'Useful when you have a list of assignee/author IDs from tasks or comments and want to retrieve display names and emails in bulk.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives. Since no other sibling handles user lookups, the guidance is sufficient.

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