lint_tonel_smalltalk_from_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Lint', which implies analysis but does not describe output format, side effects, error handling, or permissions. The fact that an output schema exists is not leveraged to clarify behavior.

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, concise sentence with no redundancy. However, for a tool lacking annotations, it may be too brief; a slightly longer description could improve context without sacrificing conciseness.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It does not mention what the linting produces, how to interpret results, or how it differs from sibling validate tools. More context is needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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%, so the schema already describes the parameter. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description neither improves nor detracts from parameter understanding.

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 verb 'lint' and the resource 'Tonel formatted Smalltalk source code from a file', differentiating it from sibling tools like 'lint_tonel_smalltalk' which likely operates on non-file input. It provides a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., validate tools or lint without file path). No when-to-use, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned, relying solely on the tool name for differentiation.

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