Apply the safe fixes to Terraform source

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses safety guarantees: only hand-verified allowlist fixes are applied, never overwrites variable/expression-wired values, returns patched HCL without writing to disk. This gives the agent a strong model of side effects and limitations.

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 compact: three sentences front-load the core action and result, then add essential safety and return details. Every sentence adds value: input format, allowlist behavior, variable protection, and no-disk-write guarantee. No redundancy or filler.

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 mutation tool with two parameters and no annotations, the description is complete: it specifies input format, the exact shape of fixes, safety filtering behavior, the skipped list with reasons, and the non-persisting return behavior. An output schema exists, so the return value description is sufficient. No critical operational detail is 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains content as the file content and fixes as findings formatted as {check_id, resource_address}, which maps directly to the schema's array-of-objects property. It doesn't enumerate every edge case, but covers the essential meaning of both parameters.

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 precise verb and resource: 'Apply the mechanically-safe fixes from scan_terraform to Terraform source and return the patched HCL.' It clearly differentiates from sibling scan_terraform by focusing on applying fixes rather than scanning, and notes the non-destructive return behavior, making its role unambiguous.

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 gives clear context: use it with findings from scan_terraform and only for allowlisted, mechanically-safe fixes. It explains that unallowlisted findings are skipped and must be handled manually, but does not explicitly name an alternative tool for non-safe fixes, leaving that to inference.

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