get_token

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

The description states 'Read-only, no side effects' and explains the return value (name, value, category) and error behavior. With no annotations, this provides essential behavioral disclosure. It does not mention rate limits or auth, but given the tool's simplicity, it is adequate.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds necessary information without waste. It is concise and well-structured.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and alternatives completely. There are no gaps identified.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must explain parameters. It clarifies 'name' as the token to look up and provides an exhaustive list of valid categories with normalized aliases. This adds significant value beyond the bare 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?

The description clearly states 'Look up a specific design token by name' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from a sibling tool by explicitly saying 'For a broad overview of all tokens, use get_design_context with category tokens instead.'

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 says 'Use this when you know the token name' and provides an alternative (get_design_context) for broad overviews. It could be more explicit about when not to use this tool for other purposes, but the guidance is clear and helpful.

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