Fetch multiple records by their IDs in a single call to retrieve detailed data after collecting IDs from a findRecords query.
Fetch multiple records by their IDs in one call. Use after collecting IDs from a findRecords query.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| recordIds | Yes | Array of record IDs to retrieve |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | ||
| total | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the meaningful behavioral trait that retrieval is batched into a single round trip, but says nothing about missing IDs, ordering of results, or limits on array size.
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 sentences, no filler, and the core capability is front-loaded before the workflow hint. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description supplies the batch semantics and upstream chaining the agent needs. It is slightly thin on edge-case behavior (unknown/duplicate IDs) but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.
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?
Only one parameter (recordIds) and schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents type and meaning. The description adds no format, size-limit, or ordering guidance beyond what the schema states, making the baseline 3 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 a specific verb ('Fetch'), resource ('records'), batch scope ('multiple ... in one call') and the query that produces the inputs. The batch wording implicitly separates it from the single-record sibling getRecord, though it never names that sibling explicitly.
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?
Gives explicit sequencing guidance — 'Use after collecting IDs from a findRecords query' — which tells the agent when in a workflow to reach for this tool. It stops short of an exclusion ('use getRecord for a single ID'), so it is clear context rather than full when/when-not routing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.