guardrail_check_payload

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

The description discloses recursive inspection of all string values, but with no annotations, it lacks explicit statement about side effects (read-only) and what happens upon detecting dangerous patterns. The output schema likely covers return format, but description could be more transparent.

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: first states core purpose, second adds key details and use case. No unnecessary words.

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 simple parameter and existing output schema, the description covers purpose, behavior, and usage context well. Could mention output summary, but not critical.

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%, but description adds meaning by specifying 'dangerous patterns' and 'recursively inspects all string values', which goes beyond the schema's basic 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 tool checks a dict/JSON payload for dangerous patterns, with specific verb 'check' and resource 'payload'. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling guardrail_check by focusing on full dict payloads, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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 provides clear context by recommending use before task_run or other write tools with user-supplied content, but does not mention exclusions or alternatives.

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