validate_citation

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

No annotations provided. The description mentions returning warnings and being a 'zero-hallucination enforcer,' but does not disclose read-only nature, auth needs, or rate limits. Adequate but not detailed.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It includes necessary format examples without verbosity. Minor redundancy in 'Parses the citation' is acceptable.

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 one parameter, no nested objects, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, input formats, and outcome (warnings). It is complete for a simple validation tool, though return structure is not specified.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single 'citation' parameter. The description adds value by listing supported citation formats, which goes beyond the schema's simple string description.

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 verb 'validate' and the resource 'Danish legal citation', distinguishing it from siblings like 'format_citation' and 'check_currency'.

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 explains the tool validates a citation, checks existence, and returns warnings, implying when to use. However, it does not explicitly exclude when not to use or compare to alternatives.

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