validate_gdpr_config

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

No annotations are provided. The description lists what the tool checks but does not explicitly state if it is read-only or has side effects. It adds some value beyond schema but lacks full behavioral disclosure.

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 with a clear summary sentence, a bullet list of checks, and a structured Args section. No redundant 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?

For a validation tool with three parameters and an output schema, the description covers purpose, checks, and parameter semantics. It does not explain return values but the output schema exists. Minor gap: could mention it is a read-only check.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description defines all three parameters: code, file_type (with example values), and strict_mode (default true). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Validate IaC configuration against GDPR mandatory requirements' and lists specific checks. The verb 'validate' with 'IaC configuration' is specific, and the tool is distinguished from sibling analysis tools by its focus on GDPR compliance.

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 includes 'BEFORE deploying', providing clear context. It implies usage before deployment but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives among siblings.

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