szlcsc_altium_import_batch

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

由于没有提供注解，描述承担了全部行为透明责任。描述明确指出了批量性、数量上限为50、逐器件执行和分别报告失败等关键行为，这些信息对代理选择工具有价值，但未说明是否具有破坏性、是否需要授权或速率限制等额外行为。

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?

描述由一句话构成，简洁明了，表达了核心功能和限制，没有冗余信息。但中文与英文混用（Altium库）可能造成理解障碍，且缺少对参数的解释，可能影响完整性。

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?

在无注解且有输出模式、7个参数且描述覆盖率为0%的情况下，描述基本说明了工具用途和主要限制，但未涵盖参数语义、输出结构（尽管有输出模式）或使用场景的完整上下文，对于复杂工具而言不够充分。

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?

输入模式中7个参数的描述覆盖率为0%，而描述未提及任何参数的含义或用法，完全依赖于模式本身的名称和默认值。对于7个参数的工具，描述无法提供超出模式名称的价值，仅identifiers参数可以通过描述中的'器件'推测其内容。

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?

描述以中文明确说明该工具的功能是批量调用Altium库生成工具，并限定了操作范围（最多50个器件），但未完全与兄弟工具区分，例如szlcsc_altium_import功能类似，仅命名不同。

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?

描述中说明了数量限制（最多50个器件）和执行方式（逐个执行并分别报告失败），暗示适用于批量场景，但未明确何时应使用本工具而非单个导入工具（如szlcsc_altium_import），也未提及前置条件或失败处理建议。

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