bulk_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions the batch size limit and API plan requirement, but does not describe the return format, error handling, or side effects. For a checking tool, these are important but not disclosed.

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 extremely concise, with only two sentences and a clear args section. Every piece of information earns its place, and the main purpose is front-loaded.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is somewhat incomplete. It covers the basic usage and constraints but omits return value details, possible error conditions, or confirmation of no side effects. Minimum viable but leaves gaps.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage for the 'urls' parameter, but the description compensates well by specifying the format ('Domains separated by ;') and providing an example. This adds essential meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 ('check') and resource ('domains'), with a specific batch limit ('up to 50,000') and plan restriction ('API plan only'). This distinguishes it from the sibling 'check_domain' tool, which presumably handles single domains.

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 bulk operations and mentions the API plan requirement, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. The sibling 'check_domain' exists, but no direct comparison is given.

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