update_prompts

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses independent item processing, partial-success reporting, and the important side effect that editing text leaves past results linked while only future runs use the new wording.

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?

Three sentences, with the key batch capability front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence contributes operational knowledge: capacity limit, field requirements, independence/failure reporting, and text-update side effects.

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 bulk mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description supplies the critical operational details: batch limit, required id, independent processing, and failure reporting. There is no obvious missing information an agent needs to invoke it 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four editable fields and their types/constraints. The description adds the batch-level context and retry guidance but does not materially deepen per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource — 'Bulk-edit up to 50 prompts in one call' — and defines the exact operation scope. This clearly distinguishes it from the singular sibling update_prompt by emphasizing the batch nature.

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 intended context is clear: use this when you need to update multiple prompts (up to 50) in one call, and the failure-reporting note guides retry behavior. It does not explicitly name update_prompt as the single-update alternative or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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