validate_tool_code

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses statelessness, safety for read-only tokens, and the return format ('valid plus errors' with line, column, message, severity, functionName). This is sufficient for understanding behavior.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the purpose, the second adds return format and safety. No wasted words. Front-loaded with key information.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters with full schema coverage, no output schema, and no nested objects. The description adequately covers purpose, usage, safety, and return value shape. It could optionally mention the max constraints (max 20 items) but the schema covers that. Overall 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (all 3 parameters are documented in the input schema). The description does not add additional parameter-level information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 purpose: 'Check Python tool code for syntax errors and banned patterns before saving it on a tool.' It uses a specific verb (check) and resource (Python tool code), and distinguishes from siblings like format_tool_code and execute_tool.

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 explicitly says to use it 'before saving it on a tool' and notes it is 'Stateless and safe for read-only service tokens,' providing clear context. It does not list alternatives or when not to use, but the purpose is well-scoped.

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