lint_dynamic_traffic

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

Lacks annotations, so description carries full burden. It details the checks performed (missing events, payload issues, rendering failures) and a prerequisite (run probe_service). Does not explicitly state it's read-only, but the nature of linting implies no mutation.

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 plus a short comparative phrase. Every sentence earns its place: first defines scope, second gives prerequisite, third provides sibling context. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 zero parameters and presence of output schema, the description covers purpose, usage instructions, and behavioral details. It is complete for this tool's complexity.

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?

No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds nothing about parameters, but none needed.

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 tool checks buffer dynamic= groups against probe broadcasts, listing specific issues (missing events, missing children, bad injected children). Distinguishes itself by calling out 'dynamic-content counterpart' to sibling lint_against_traffic.

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 instructs to run probe_service first, and identifies as the dynamic-content counterpart to lint_against_traffic, telling the agent exactly when to use this tool versus its sibling.

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