migratorxpress_validate_auth_file

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, so safety is clear. Description adds important context that actual connectivity is not tested, which annotations do not cover. Minor gap: no mention of return value or error behavior.

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?

Two sentences, no redundant phrases. Front-loaded with core purpose, followed by usage hint and limitation. Every sentence contributes meaning.

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?

For a low-complexity tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and a key limitation (no connectivity test). It could improve by describing the validation result format (e.g., returns success/failure messages), but it's still clear enough for an AI agent.

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%, so each parameter is documented. The description adds value for required_auth_ids by explaining its purpose ('verify source, target, and migration DB credentials are all present'). This goes beyond the schema's 'optional list.'

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 explicitly states the tool validates a MigratorXpress JSON credentials file, specifying it checks well-formedness and required fields. It distinguishes from siblings by positioning as a pre-check before migratorxpress_preview_command.

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 clear when-to-use guidance: 'Call this before migratorxpress_preview_command to catch credential issues early.' Also clarifies what it does not do ('Does NOT test actual database connectivity'), preventing misuse.

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