dataverse_validate_view

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, establishing safety. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: it fetches live XML, checks structure according to 16 rules, and skips layout rules when layoutxml is null. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences: first states primary action and rule count, second details the rule breakdown, third provides usage context about automatic execution. No redundancy, front-loaded with purpose.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is complete enough for a validation tool with 1 required param and no nested objects. It covers behavior, rule structure, and usage context. Could mention output format briefly, but output schema fills that 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 input schema includes descriptions for both parameters (view_id as GUID, dataverse_url as URL). The description does not add new parameter semantics beyond the schema. With schema descriptions present, baseline is 3; the description adds minimal contextual value (e.g., 'fetches the live XML' linking to view_id).

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 it validates a Dataverse view's FetchXml and LayoutXml against 16 structural rules, specifying the rule groups (1-8, 9-15, 16). It distinguishes from sibling tools like dataverse_get_view (retrieval) and other validation tools (dataverse_validate_app, dataverse_validate_formxml) by its specific validation scope.

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 clear guidance on when to use this tool: as a standalone pre-check before write operations, noting that write tools automatically run this before every PATCH. It implies when not to use (when doing a PATCH, automatic) but does not explicitly list alternatives among siblings.

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