fix_json

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

No annotations provided; the description mentions dry_run mode behavior but does not disclose potential side effects like overwriting the original file or creating backups, which are important for a repair tool.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's action and key features with no redundant information.

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 omits what the tool returns (e.g., success status, repaired content), leaving an information gap for the agent about the tool's output.

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%, and the description only repeats the dry_run behavior without adding extra meaning about path requirements or expected file format beyond the schema.

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's purpose: 'Repair broken JSON' and lists specific fixes (strip comments, fix trailing commas, convert single quotes, remove BOM/NUL), making it distinct from sibling tools like fix_encoding or cleanup_file.

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 implies when to use (for JSON files with syntax issues) but does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use or mention alternatives among siblings like fix_encoding or convert_format.

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