sezzle_validate_redirect_urls

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

Annotations indicate a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, which the description aligns with by saying 'validate.' The description adds useful context about the validation criteria (HTTPS and merchant hosts), beyond what annotations provide. However, it does not disclose return behavior or edge cases.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the primary action and constraints. 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?

The tool has a nested parameter and no output schema. The description explains what is validated but does not specify what the tool returns (e.g., boolean, list of failures), which is important for an agent to interpret results. Given the simplicity, this is a moderate gap.

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?

The schema has no descriptions for the 'redirects' object or its properties. The description partially compensates by mentioning 'cancel and complete redirects' and 'supplied merchant hosts,' which map to the input properties. However, it does not explain the expected format of allowed_hosts or the structure of the redirects object.

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 tool's function: to validate cancel and complete redirect URLs against HTTPS and merchant-provided hosts. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling validation tools by targeting redirects.

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 implies the tool is used when redirect URLs need to be checked, but it does not state when to prefer it over alternatives or any prerequisites. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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