lint-files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must reveal behavioral traits. It explains that the tool uses Stylelint and requires absolute paths, but it does not disclose error handling, return format, or behavior with non-existent files. For a linting tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core action, and the second gives the critical input requirement. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the necessary information.

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the tool's purpose and the sole input requirement. It could mention the output (lint results) but is not essential for basic usage.

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 provides no description for the 'filePaths' parameter (0% coverage). The description compensates by specifying that paths must be absolute, refer to CSS files, and be in the correct OS format. This adds valuable meaning beyond the schema.

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 lints files using Stylelint, specifically CSS files. The verb 'lint' and resource 'files' are specific, and the tool name reinforces this. With no sibling tools provided, the distinction is clear.

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 explicitly instructs the user to provide absolute file paths in the correct OS format, which is essential for proper usage. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, but given no siblings, this is sufficient.

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