contacts_group_batch_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get' (implying read-only) and the API method, but does not explicitly confirm safety, idempotency, error handling, or rate limits. For a read operation, additional transparency (e.g., 'read-only, returns groups if they exist') would be valuable.

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 efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, earning high marks for conciseness.

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 tool is simple (one param, no output schema), so the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency, which are needed for complete context. The gaps are noticeable but not severe for a straightforward read tool.

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% and the schema description already explains the parameter format (comma-separated resource names). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so 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?

The description clearly states 'Get multiple contact groups at once', which is a specific verb+resource. The name includes 'batch_get', distinguishing it from 'contacts_group_get' (single) and 'contacts_groups_list' (list all). The parenthetical 'contactGroups.batchGet' reinforces the API method.

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 implicitly suggests using this tool when multiple groups are needed, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like 'contacts_group_get' for single groups or 'contacts_groups_list' for listing, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and sibling list.

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