get_component

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

Discloses read-only, no side effects. Explains return behavior in three cases: single match, no match, ambiguous. No contradictions with annotations (none provided). Description fully covers behavioral expectations.

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?

Concise yet comprehensive: three sentences covering action, context, return behavior, and sibling alternative. No filler, each sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and no annotations, description fully explains return values (three cases), usage context, and parameters. Completes information needed for correct invocation.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description explains both parameters: name (lookup key) and context (path scope for disambiguation). Adds meaning beyond schema types.

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 tool's purpose: 'Look up a component by name or id.' It specifies read-only nature and distinguishes from sibling 'get_design_context' by directing users there for listing all components.

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?

Explicit guidance: 'Use this when you need implementation details for a known component to reuse it rather than recreate it.' Also provides alternative: 'For a list of all components, use get_design_context with category 'components' instead.' Explains when to pass context.

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