Validate Mermaid Syntax

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds the key behavioral detail that no rendering occurs, which is useful context beyond what annotations convey. However, it doesn't disclose error handling or the effect of suppressErrors, but the output schema likely covers return details.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It clearly and efficiently communicates the core function.

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 is simple and has good annotations, but the description omits parameter semantics and explicit usage guidance. With an output schema present, the return values are likely covered, yet the missing parameter details and comparative guidance reduce overall completeness.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. While 'code' is inferable from context, the behavior of 'suppressErrors' is completely unexplained, leaving a significant gap for agent understanding.

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 uses the specific verb 'Parse' and resource 'Mermaid code', and explicitly clarifies that it does not render, which distinguishes it from related tools like create or detect. This makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 a use case (validate syntax without rendering) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like sap.artifact.mermaid.detect or create. No direct comparison or exclusion is provided, leaving the usage context implied rather than explicit.

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