batch_screening

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses that the tool is for batch screening and returns risk level and score per address, but does not mention any side effects, security implications, or performance characteristics (e.g., rate limits).

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, one sentence with key information. It is front-loaded with the purpose. It could be slightly improved by adding a brief note about the chain parameter or when to use.

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 moderate complexity (two parameters, no output schema), the description adequately explains what it does and its output. However, it could mention the meaning of the risk level or score, or that the chain parameter is optional.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters ('addresses' and 'chain'). The description adds that addresses are multiple (up to 50) and that the output is per address, which enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 purpose: batch AML screening for multiple addresses. It specifies the action (screening), resource (addresses), and output (risk level and score per address). This distinguishes it from siblings like check_address_risk which likely screens single addresses.

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 indicates the batch nature and a limit of 50 addresses, implying it's for screening multiple addresses at once. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like check_address_risk or sanctions_check, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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