Batch Resolve Libraries

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint etc. Description adds: 'Max 20 per call', 'Registry-only lookup — no external npm/PyPI/crates fallback', and 'Returns results for each library.' No contradictions. Minor gap: no mention of error handling or partial results.

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 paragraphs: first states action and key constraints, second provides usage context. Front-loaded, 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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, description covers purpose, constraints, usage, and alternatives. Lacks detailed output structure (e.g., keys returned), but no output schema exists. Nearly complete.

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% with description and example. Description restates max 20 but adds no new semantic info beyond schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States clearly: 'Resolve multiple library names to IDs and docs URLs in a single call.' Distinguishes from sibling tools gt_resolve_library (single with external fallback) and gt_auto_scan (scanning project files).

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you already have a list of library names and need to batch-resolve them to IDs efficiently' and points to alternatives: gt_resolve_library for single with external fallback, gt_auto_scan for project scanning.

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