Import Entries

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 explains the batch limit, the replace-only mode, and the deleteOrphans parameter behavior (deletes scope entries missing from batch when true). It does not explicitly mention that the tool performs a destructive update (replacing entries), but the combination of 'mode=replace' and 'deleteOrphans' implies mutation, which is sufficiently transparent.

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 (two sentences) but the first sentence is dense, packing multiple pieces of advice. It efficiently conveys essential information without unnecessary words, though a slight restructuring could improve readability.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, nested objects, output schema exists), the description covers the key workflow and constraints (batch size, mode, deleteOrphans strategy, alias). It omits immediate return value details, but the output schema covers that. No major gaps for an AI agent to use the tool 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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining how to use parameters together (e.g., splitting batches, deleteOrphans=false until final batch, scope filter as filter object), providing context for effective invocation.

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 tool imports entries with a max of 50 per call, explicitly identifies it as an alias for replace-entries (mode=replace), and distinguishes it from siblings like delete-entries and set-entries by outlining different workflows for full re-import.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool (bulk import of up to 50 entries per call) and when to use alternatives (e.g., delete-entries + set-entries for full re-import, or replace-entries with deleteOrphans=false until final batch). It clearly specifies splitting large catalogs into batches and the deleteOrphans strategy.

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