arvan_iac_terraform_validate

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description is not required to state safety. It adds value by explaining that init runs 'terraform init -backend=false' to resolve providers, and that disabling init gives an offline syntax-only check. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a concise explanation of the init option. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the init parameter but omits details about the 'files' and 'directory' parameters. There is no output schema, yet the description does not mention return values (e.g., validation errors). For a tool with three parameters, this is incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains the 'init' parameter's behavior but does not describe 'files' or 'directory' parameters. The agent cannot infer what format 'files' (object with string values) expects or how 'directory' is used.

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 the tool validates Terraform configuration, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like arvan_iac_opentofu_validate by including 'terraform' in the name and describing init behavior.

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?

The description provides context on when to use the tool (validate Terraform config) and when to enable/disable init for offline vs provider-resolving checks. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like terraform plan.

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