Validate Reference

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

No annotations provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'validate ... reachable' without explaining how (e.g., HTTP request, timeout, redirect handling, error responses). Lacks essential context for safe invocation.

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?

Single sentence is front-loaded and concise, but critically underspecified. While brevity is valued, the description omits essential details, making it insufficient for proper tool use.

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 tool's complexity (nested object parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far from complete. No information on return value, success/failure indicators, or error conditions. Agent cannot predict behavior.

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 coverage is 0% and description adds no meaning to the 'reference' parameter. The parameter is a nested object with required fields but no explanation of their roles (e.g., what 'type' values imply, URL format expectations). Agent cannot infer correct usage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool validates that a content reference URL is reachable, with a specific verb and resource. It uniquely identifies the tool's function among siblings like 'fetch-reference', which likely fetches content rather than checking reachability.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'fetch-reference'). The description does not mention conditions, prerequisites, or scenarios where validation is appropriate.

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