Validate Completion Evidence

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it is a pre-validation, not authoritative, and required under strict policy. No contradiction.

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: first clearly states purpose, second adds usage condition. No redundant words, front-loaded.

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?

Output schema exists but not described, parameter details missing. Adequately covers policy context but insufficient for a 6-param tool with nested objects.

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%, but description does not explain individual parameters (preset_id, vendor_payload, etc.). Only implicit mention of payloads. Fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Verb 'pre-validates' is specific, resource 'completion evidence' clear, and constraints against catalog JSON Schemas and forbidden fields are stated. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling submit tools via policy requirement.

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?

States when to use ('Required before evidence submit tools when PAYBOND_MCP_EVIDENCE_POLICY=strict') and notes that Harbor is authoritative at submit time. No explicit when-not-to-use, but context is clear.

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