Validate Custom Fields Values With Configurable Field Set

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

The description claims the tool creates a new object on success, which suggests a mutation, but annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. Without clarity on what exactly the tool does (validation vs. creation), the behavioral transparency is very poor.

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 includes relevant information but is somewhat verbose, containing API endpoint and status code details. The contradictory creation claim adds unnecessary confusion. It is reasonably structured but not optimally concise.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description fails to explain the validation behavior clearly, such as what constitutes a successful validation vs. failure. The claim of creating an object misrepresents the tool's functionality, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 input schema covers all 7 parameters with detailed descriptions, and the description merely reiterates the required ones. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds no additional meaning, earning a baseline score.

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 that it returns validation messages for custom fields, which is the primary purpose. However, it also claims to create a new Custom - Configurable Tools object, which contradicts the tool's name and endpoint. This confusion lowers the score.

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 says 'Use this to perform the validate custom action on Custom - Configurable Tools' and lists required parameters. It does not provide guidance on when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives, making the usage context incomplete.

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