get_kb_articles_by_ids

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention important traits such as whether the articles are returned in full or summarized, any limits on the number of IDs, or whether the order of IDs is preserved in the response.

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 very concise, consisting of a single sentence with no superfluous information. However, it could be slightly expanded to include essential details without becoming verbose.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is still incomplete. It does not explain what the output contains (e.g., full article content or just metadata) or any limitations. Sibling tools like 'get_kb_article_attachments' suggest related functionality, but the description provides no context for differentiation.

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%, meaning the schema itself provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add any meaning beyond the parameter name 'article_ids' and type 'array of integers'. It lacks details on expected format, constraints, or behavior.

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'), the resource ('Knowledge Base articles'), and the method ('by their IDs'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_kb_articles' (which lists all) and 'search_kb_articles' (which searches).

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 implies usage for fetching specific articles by ID, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_kb_articles' or 'search_kb_articles'. No when-not or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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