validate

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

Despite no annotations, the description details what the tool analyzes (anti-patterns, lengths, interfaces, tests) and returns (score, issues, warnings, metrics, verdict). Could mention that it does not modify code, but overall covers behavioral traits well.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (WHEN TO USE, PERFORMS ANALYSIS, RETURNS, EXAMPLE). Every sentence adds value, and the format is front-loaded and efficient.

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 no output schema, the description fully details the return structure and covers usage context, analysis scope, and intended workflow. No obvious gaps.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds an example usage but does not significantly elaborate on parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides.

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 a specific verb ('Analyze') and resource ('code against coding standards') and distinguishes from sibling 'verify' by noting it is used before final approval.

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 lists when to use (after writing code, during development) and when not to use (before verify for final approval), providing clear context and alternatives.

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