Batch Interview Agents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description does not contradict them. The description adds the batch 'at once' behavior, but no further context such as response format, failure handling, or concurrency side effects, which would add value beyond the 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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences. The first states the core action, and the second provides a meaningful use case. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or padding.

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 and has no output schema, so the description should cover return behavior. It explains the action but does not mention what the agent can expect as a response (e.g., per-agent answers) or how errors are handled (e.g., missing agent names). This leaves a noticeable gap for a batch operation.

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 schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond loosely echoing 'same question' (message) and 'multiple agents' (agent_names), which maps naturally to the existing schema.

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 uses a specific verb+resource structure: 'Send the same question to multiple agents at once.' This clearly distinguishes the batch tool from siblings like mirofish_interview_agent (single agent) and mirofish_interview_all (all agents), even without naming them explicitly.

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 offers an implied use case ('useful for gathering diverse perspectives') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as mirofish_interview_agent or mirofish_interview_all. There are no exclusions or decision criteria.

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