Lint an entire private-plugin file set against TRMNL Framework conventions before writing remote content, catching markup issues early to keep deployments valid.
Lint an entire private-plugin file set against TRMNL Framework conventions before writing remote content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| files | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it validates an entire file set before remote writing, but it does not explain the validation response, error behavior, or any file-count limits.
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 wasted wording. It efficiently states the action and the pre-write timing constraint.
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 read-only annotations cover safety and the purpose is clear, but with no output schema and no parameter descriptions, an agent still lacks detail about the validation result and file-set format. The description is minimally adequate but leaves meaningful gaps.
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?
The single parameter is a nested object of file strings, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only implies 'file set' and does not explain whether keys are filenames, what values represent, or that up to 10 files are allowed.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lint an entire private-plugin file set against TRMNL Framework conventions.' The phrase 'before writing remote content' also distinguishes it from the write-oriented sibling tools such as trmnl_write_markup.
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?
It gives a clear usage context by saying the lint should happen 'before writing remote content,' which implies a pre-write validation workflow. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is sufficiently clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.