ass__lint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses that it runs 16 checks, returns a JSON report per check, and that strict mode adds field-count validations. It doesn't mention side effects, but a linter is inherently read-only and that is implied. The level of detail exceeds minimal expectations.

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 @remarks and @param blocks, front-loading the primary purpose. It is somewhat detailed but not wasteful; each sentence contributes information about checks or parameters. Slightly verbose but acceptable.

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?

With no output schema, the description mentions 'Returns a JSON report with per-check results', which gives a general sense. It doesn't detail the report structure or error handling, but the enumerated checks and strict-mode addition provide reasonable completeness for a validation tool.

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 0%, but the description includes @param documentation for each parameter: ass_file_path (path), strict (enables additional checks), and __mcp_response_mode (response mode with defaults). This fully compensates for the schema's lack of description and adds meaning to each parameter.

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 starts with 'Lint and validate an ASS (Advanced SubStation Alpha) subtitle file', using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ass__create_template and ass__get_spec by focusing on validation/linting.

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 explains what the tool checks (16 structural rules, strict mode) and when strict mode is relevant. It doesn't explicitly state alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough that no alternative lint tool exists among siblings.

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