validate_change

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

Discloses it is a pure observation, no side effects, runs syntax, structural, cost, and security checks, returns decision without coaching. Lacks detail on output format but otherwise transparent.

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?

Description is concise (few sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, parameters, and behavioral traits well. Minor gap: no output structure description, but given no output schema, it is mostly complete for a single-file validation tool.

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?

All parameters are described in the schema at 100% coverage; the description adds limited additional context (e.g., old_content enables cost regression), but baseline is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the tool validates a proposed file write using three rings, returns a decision without applying changes, and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'validate_change_with_workspace' by being single-file and speed-oriented.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when the change is contained to one file or when speed matters more than cross-file safety', implicitly guiding against the workspace variant.

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