get_opportunities

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable transparency about the internal splitting of requests for 11–50 ids and parallel execution, as well as the return of full records with specific fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise with four sentences, each adding value. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and efficiently covers usage, transparency, and return information without redundancy.

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?

Given no output schema, the description adequately outlines the returned fields. It covers the batch behavior and limits. While it could be more detailed about the exact response structure, it provides sufficient context for a batch fetch tool with known behavior.

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 detailed descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating what the returned records contain (value, milestone, owner, party) and reiterating the splitting logic. This is above the baseline of 3.

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 'Batch-fetch up to 50 opportunities by id,' specifying the verb (fetch), resource (opportunities), and scope (by id). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_opportunity (single id) and filter_opportunities (search).

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 explains when to use this tool: for batch fetching 1–50 ids, with details on round trips. It explicitly recommends using get_opportunity for a single id, providing clear guidance on alternatives.

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