lint

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

The description discloses key behaviors: two modes, auto-fix capability, and output type. However, it lacks details on error handling, default behavior when parameters are omitted, and how analyze mode processes the problems JSON. No annotations are provided to compensate.

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?

The description is structured with bullet points and emojis but is verbose and includes informal 'HINT' formatting. It could be more concise while retaining clarity.

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 10 parameters, no schema coverage, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not fully explain all parameters or the output structure despite an output schema existing. Key behavioral details are missing.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description should explain all 10 parameters. It only covers action, fix, and mentions problems_json. Parameters like select, ignore, include_hints, output_path, and the analyze boolean are not described, leaving significant gaps.

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 identifies the tool as a linting tool with two distinct actions (run and analyze). It specifies the linter (ruff/flake8) and side effects (auto-fix). Among sibling tools, none are lint-related, so it stands out.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, or when to choose run vs analyze. The description only hints at the action parameter without explaining selection criteria.

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