Validate Patch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states validation without applying, but fails to explain what validation entails (e.g., error reporting), the role of 'dryRun' and 'confirm' parameters, or side effects. Minimal behavioral context.

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 sentence, front-loaded, and contains no filler. However, given the need for more parameter and behavioral explanation, it could be slightly more verbose without losing conciseness.

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 three parameters, no parameter descriptions in schema, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It omits what the tool returns, validation criteria, and how to construct the operations array. The agent lacks critical context for correct invocations.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no information about the three parameters. It does not explain the purpose of 'dryRun', 'confirm', or the structure of 'operations'. The agent gains no semantic understanding beyond the schema itself.

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 verb 'validate' and resource 'patch operations', and distinguishes from sibling 'apply_patch' by explicitly saying 'without applying them'. This leaves no ambiguity about the tool's purpose.

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 implies usage when validation is desired without commitment, but does not explicitly mention when to use this vs alternatives like 'apply_patch' or 'dry_run_patch'. Guidance is implicit, not explicit.

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