axint.validate

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

Adds details beyond annotations: runs 134 rules, returns JSON diagnostics, writes no files, uses no network. Aligns with readOnlyHint and idempotentHint.

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 but could be better structured; uses 'Use:' and 'Effects:' to separate concerns, though slightly run-on.

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 output schema existence, description explains output format and tool behavior fully. No missing context for a single-parameter validation tool.

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%, but description adds constraint about complete file starting with axint, improving clarity beyond 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?

The description clearly states it validates TypeScript intent definitions, runs the full pipeline, and returns diagnostics. It distinguishes from swift.validate for existing Swift code.

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 tells when to use: 'use for TypeScript DSL diagnostics before Swift output; use swift.validate for existing Swift.' Provides clear alternatives.

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