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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose validation, defaults, and output-format contexts. However, it does not explain allowFallback behavior, what happens when a style or slug is unavailable, or other retrieval-side 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action and prerequisite, then style guidance, then format guidance. Every sentence adds distinct selection or usage information with no wasted prose.

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 four-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, it covers the core retrieval and format choices. It is still incomplete because allowFallback semantics and fallback behavior are not described.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains slug prerequisite, style preference/default, and format semantics well, but omits the allowFallback parameter entirely.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a validated SVG variant' after selecting a Digche slug. It is clear what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as search_icons or preview_icons.

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?

It gives clear context for use: after selecting a slug, with 'Prefer Linear' unless another Digche style is already in use. The 'jsx' vs 'svg' guidance specifies when each format applies, but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions are named.

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