batch_remove_items

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It notes the operation is 'destructive' and 'batch', which are key traits. However, it lacks details on error handling, partial success, or reversibility, which are useful for a destructive batch operation.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core action. Every part serves a purpose, with no wasted words.

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 description covers the basic batch removal functionality. For a batch operation with no output schema, lack of details on atomicity, error reporting, or post-removal state leaves some gaps. It is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by recommending ID preference over name, which enhances parameter usage understanding beyond the schema's basic field descriptions.

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 removes multiple tasks or projects in a single operation, using specific verbs ('Remove') and resources ('tasks or projects'). It distinguishes from the sibling 'remove_item' by indicating batch scope, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 a usage preference ('Prefer IDs for destructive batch operations'), guiding the agent to use IDs over names for safety. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or compare alternatives beyond the implicit single-removal tool.

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