axint.validate

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

Description adds beyond annotations: 'read-only diagnostics; writes no files and uses no network,' plus details on diagnostic rules (134) and output format. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with key purpose and usage. Slightly verbose but all sentences earn their place. Could be slightly tighter.

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?

Output schema exists; description complements it by detailing diagnostic JSON structure. No gaps in coverage for a validation tool with clear inputs and outputs.

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% for the single 'source' param. Description adds important nuance: 'Must be a complete file starting with an axint import, not a code fragment,' which is not in the schema description.

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 'Validate a TypeScript intent definition without generating Swift.' Distinguishes from siblings like axint.swift.validate and axint.compile. Specific verb+resource.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'use for TypeScript DSL diagnostics before Swift output; use swift.validate for existing Swift.' Also mentions when inputs are appropriate and effects.

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