peaka_create_cache_batch

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, indicating mutation but non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it avoids partial-failure states (transactional guarantee) and shares schedule expression behavior with peaka_create_cache. No contradictions with 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?

Two concise sentences in the first paragraph cover purpose and key benefit, and a second paragraph gives a critical usage guideline. No filler or repetition; every sentence earns its place.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description does not explain what the response contains (e.g., IDs or status of created caches). Error handling or partial failure behavior beyond the mention is missing. The tool has moderate complexity as a batch operation, so more detail would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100% (all parameters described). The description adds minor value by explaining that 'items' support the same optional schedule expressions as peaka_create_cache, with examples, but the schema already describes fullRefreshSchedule and incrementalSchedule with examples. Baseline given high coverage.

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 creates caches for multiple tables in a single call, and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'peaka_create_cache' by avoiding partial-failure states. The verb 'create' and resource 'caches for multiple tables' are specific, leaving no ambiguity.

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 tells when to use this tool instead of repeated peaka_create_cache calls, and provides a clear prerequisite: call peaka_list_projects to obtain projectId. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it, but the context sufficiently implies the alternative.

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