axint.swift.validate

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

Description explicitly states read-only nature, no writes, no network, aligning with annotations. Adds behavioral context beyond annotations, such as being diagnostic-only and the specific rules covered.

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?

Concise with efficient structure: purpose, use, effects. Slightly dense but well-organized and front-loaded. Could be more structured with bullet points, but still effective.

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?

Covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use, safety profile, and pairing with fix tool. With output schema present, return value explanation is not needed. Complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add significant extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool validates Swift source against 150 build-time rules, with specific examples of bugs it catches. It distinguishes from siblings like axint.swift.fix by mentioning pairing and different 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?

Explicitly states when to use: on generated or edited Swift before build, and suggests pairing with swift.fix for repairs. Provides clear context for when it is appropriate.

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