The SvGrid public API grouped by category (components, headless, scheduler, data ops, export, row models, features, virtualization, accessibility, utilities), for the version this server tracks.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the API is public and version-scoped, and that content is grouped by category, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, describe the response format, or mention any output behavior.
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, information-dense sentence. Every element earns its place: the resource, the grouping principle, the included categories, and the version scoping. There is no filler or repetition.
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 no-parameter, read-only reference lookup tool, this description is largely complete. It tells the agent what data is available and that it is version-specific. A small gap is the lack of any statement about the response shape or whether it returns a list, tree, or paginated document, but this is minor for such a simple 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?
The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies because no schema detail is missing and the description doesn't need to compensate for undocumented parameters.
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 identifies the tool's resource as the SvGrid public API reference and adds meaningful scope by listing categories and noting version tracking. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search or list_examples, though it lacks an explicit verb such as 'retrieve' or 'return'.
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?
No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives like search, fetch, or get_example_source. The wording implies it is for browsing the API reference by category, but the conditions for choosing it over search are left unstated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
The search→fetch and list_examples→get_example_source pairs form clear workflows, and check_svgrid_code is distinct. The only real ambiguity is that fetch also accepts a demo id, which overlaps somewhat with get_example_source, though fetch returns page text rather than .svelte source.
Most tools follow a descriptive verb_noun pattern: get_api_reference, get_example_source, list_examples, check_svgrid_code. The bare verbs search and fetch are minor deviations, but the names remain predictable and easy to distinguish.
Six tools is a tight, well-scoped set for a documentation-and-code-support server. Each tool earns its place and together they cover discover, read, reference, example, and verify workflows without redundancy.
The tool surface covers the full assistant loop: search documentation, fetch doc content, read the API reference, browse and copy demo source, and validate code against the real SvGrid API. There is no obvious missing operation that would create a dead end for an agent.