Lint recipe library

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

Annotations indicate readOnly and non-destructive. Description reinforces offline nature, no calls to TouchDesigner, and lists all checks performed. 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?

Single paragraph front-loads purpose, then lists checks, then mentions report. No redundant information. Efficient and well-structured.

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?

Lacks output schema but mentions 'structured report'. For a linter, this may be sufficient, but more detail on report format would improve completeness.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions and enums. Description adds context by listing rule IDs and clarifying default behavior. Minimal extra value but schema already rich.

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 it is an offline semantic linter for recipes/*.json with a detailed list of checks. Distinguishes from siblings by its specific linting focus.

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 says it never calls TouchDesigner, implying no side effects. Tells when to use (linting) and implies when not to use (when modifications are needed).

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