generate_validation_report

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Discloses it runs checks and produces formatted output, but does not specify read-only nature, error handling, or behavior with missing files. Adequate but incomplete.

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 packs purpose, scope, and output format efficiently. No wasted words, though could benefit from slight structuring.

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 no output schema or annotations, description adequately covers what tool does and returns (Markdown report). Missing details on validation criteria or fallback behavior, but sufficient for typical usage.

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 100% so baseline is 3. Description does not add meaning beyond schema; merely mentions 'local files' which aligns with the htmlFilePath parameter.

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 explicitly states it runs multiple validation checks (HTML, CSS, SEO, Schema, Links) on local files and generates a Markdown report with summary tables. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform individual validations.

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?

Implies use when a comprehensive multi-category report is needed, and sibling tools exist for individual checks. However, lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or mention of prerequisites.

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