get_dialogs_by_ids

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal extra context by noting the tool retrieves fields like is_pinned/unread in a batch, but it doesn't describe return format, pagination, or other behaviors. With annotations present, this is adequate but not rich.

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 two sentences: the first states the core function, and the second provides a practical use case. There is no redundancy or filler, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 a simple read-only batch operation with strong annotations and an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, the lack of explanation for the 'compact' parameter leaves a gap. Overall, it is mostly complete for selecting and invoking correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implicitly maps chat_ids to 'N конкретных диалогах' but gives no details about the 'compact' parameter (boolean, default true) or how chat_ids are interpreted beyond the schema. This is insufficient for a 0% coverage tool.

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 action ('get information') and resource ('N specific dialogs') in one call, distinguishing it from siblings like list_chats or get_chat_info by its batch and ID-based nature. The mention of checking is_pinned/unread further clarifies its focused purpose.

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 an explicit use case: 'полезно для batch-проверки is_pinned/unread перед массовой операцией' (useful for batch-checking is_pinned/unread before a mass operation). This gives clear context for when to use the tool, but it does not mention exclusions or explicitly name alternatives like get_chat_info.

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