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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does disclose 'Read-only: no side effects' plus the return format (markdown text in SKILL.md format). It does not mention error behavior or limits, but for a zero-param read-only export tool this is nearly complete.

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?

Front-loaded with the tool's identity and purpose, then the when/when-not guidance. Slight redundancy: the '.agents/skills/ or system prompt' destination is stated twice in near-identical wording, which could be trimmed.

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 parameterless read-only export with no output schema, the description states what is returned (markdown SKILL.md text) and how to use it. An agent has everything needed to call and consume it.

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 the baseline is 4. The description confirms 'No parameters,' consistent with the empty schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get the Designesy SKILL.md') and defines exactly what the resource is: the agent-skill-format export of the design-system contract. It explicitly differentiates from siblings designesy_contract (raw JSON) and designesy_score (scoring).

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?

Provides an explicit 'Use this when' condition (steering how an agent builds UI) and an explicit 'When NOT to use' clause routing to designesy_contract and designesy_score. Nothing is left to inference.

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