files_validate_yaml_content

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

No annotations provided, but description states it is read-only ('without saving'), returns result/error, and handles custom tags. Sufficient for a validation tool; no contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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?

With output schema present, description adequately covers high-level behavior and return type. For a single-parameter validation tool, it is complete enough.

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?

Only parameter 'content' with 0% schema description coverage. Description only says 'YAML content', adding minimal value beyond the parameter name. Could specify format or constraints.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Validate', resource 'YAML content', and key distinction 'without saving'. Also mentions tolerance of Home Assistant custom tags, which differentiates it from other file tools. High clarity.

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?

Explicitly mentions that the tool tolerates HA custom tags, indicating it's suitable for validating real HA config files. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the context is clear enough.

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