validate_schema_markup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full burden. It discloses the core behavior (find and validate JSON-LD), but does not detail side effects, permissions, or return format. Basic transparency but gaps remain.

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?

A single sentence of 14 words that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. No unnecessary information, front-loaded with the key verb and resource.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is somewhat adequate but lacks details about return values or error handling. The phrase 'catching syntax issues' hints at output, but is not fully complete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already describes the 'htmlContent' parameter adequately. The description adds no new semantic information 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 tool's function: 'Finds and validates the JSON-LD schema blocks within the HTML, catching syntax issues.' It uses a specific verb ('validates') and resource ('JSON-LD schema blocks'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'validate_local_html' which validate general HTML.

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 validating JSON-LD in HTML, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'validate_local_html'). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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