validate_citations

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

No annotations provided. Description only lists detected issues but does not disclose non-obvious behaviors such as whether the tool modifies input, expected input validation, or edge case handling.

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 with front-loaded purpose statement. Every sentence adds value; no unnecessary 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?

Adequate for the parameter set, but lacks output format description (no output schema). Agent may not know the structure of validation results, which is important 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 100% with descriptions for both parameters. Description adds meaning by explaining the validation purpose and types of checks performed, going beyond schema labels.

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?

Clearly states bidirectional validation between in-text citations and references, listing specific issues detected. Distinguishes from sibling tools like format_references_apa7 by focusing on validation rather than formatting.

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?

Implies usage for citation validation but lacks explicit guidance on when to use vs siblings like search_citations or analyze_literature. No when-not-to-use instructions.

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