Validate Schema.org structured data (JSON-LD) from a URL, HTML snippet, or JSON object.
Validate Schema.org structured data (JSON-LD) from a URL, HTML snippet, or JSON object.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| type | Yes | The type of input provided | |
| data | Yes | The URL, HTML content, or JSON string to validate |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as what the tool returns, error behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The only additional information is the input types, which are already implied by the enum parameter.
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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core purpose. No unnecessary words or 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?
Given only 2 parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. However, it lacks information on return values, validation error messages, or usage examples, leaving the agent with gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters adequately. The description reinforces the three input types from the type parameter enum, but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 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?
The description clearly states the verb 'Validate' and the resource 'Schema.org structured data (JSON-LD)', and specifies the three input formats (URL, HTML snippet, JSON object). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools which are mostly Bing SEO and analytics tools.
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 implies usage for validating Schema.org data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no exclusions, and no context about prerequisites or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.