suggest_contract_fix

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states validation and fix suggestions but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, requires permissions, or what side effects occur. Missing clarity on whether it modifies state.

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, no fluff. The first sentence states purpose and mechanism, the second provides a concrete use case. Highly efficient.

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?

With two simple parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete: it does not explain the format of the returned fixes (e.g., list of suggestions, structured errors). Agents may need more guidance on the return value.

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 100% (both parameters described). The description reiterates the schema's descriptions without adding meaningful new semantics or usage details beyond what the schema provides.

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 validates a JSON payload against a Zod schema and suggests fixes. The verb 'validate' and phrase 'suggest fixes' is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that generate mocks or violations.

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 includes an explicit use-case question ('Use to answer: why does this payload fail validation, and how do I fix it?'), indicating when to use. However, it lacks when-not-to-use guidance or mention of alternative tools.

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