si_batch_check

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add non-obvious behavioral context: the built-in pacing delay to avoid ARNES rate-limiting/IP blocking, and the shape of the result (available vs registered lists with registration links). It does not state permissions or whether the scan is purely read-only.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then the return shape. The phrase 'intelligent pacing delay' is slightly promotional but does convey the rate-limit motive without wasting much space.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description usefully describes the return value (available vs registered lists plus registration links), and both parameters are covered. Missing only auth/permission context for what is a registry-querying 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 both parameters are already documented in the schema with defaults and examples. The description only restates the domain list concept and the pacing purpose, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the 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?

States a specific verb and resource: batch-scanning a list of .si candidate domains. The word 'Batch' implicitly distinguishes it from the single-domain sibling si_check_domain, but the description never names the alternative or states the contrast 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?

No when-to-use guidance, no conditions for choosing this over si_check_domain or si_fast_checkout, and no prerequisites. The pacing rationale explains a behavior, not when the agent should pick this tool.

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