Validate a transform payload (local)

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not restate. It adds value by detailing the validation scope (required fields, evidence shape, cross-references), going beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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 sentence that conveys the essential purpose and scope. No wasted words, and the key validation points are 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?

No output schema is provided, and the description omits any information about return values (e.g., validation errors or success indicators). For a validation tool, this is a significant 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description explains the purpose of validation across the three parameters (requests, rightsContexts, processingContexts) and their cross-referencing. This adds meaning beyond raw schema, though individual parameter details are absent.

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 'Statically validate a transform payload before sending it', specifying the verb (validate) and resource (transform payload). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'transform' which assumes actual execution, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'before sending it' implies use prior to the 'transform' tool, but no explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. For a validation tool, this is minimal but functional guidance.

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