Resolve Architecture SVG

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

Annotations already declare the operation safe and idempotent. The description adds the specific behavior of trying bundled assets first and only using online Iconify-compatible assets when enabled (allowOnline). It also asserts 'safe' output, implying sanitization, which is useful beyond the readOnly/idempotent hints.

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 18-word sentence that front-loads the core action and adds key behavioral details. No filler or redundant information.

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?

Although annotations and output schema exist, the description lacks explicit parameter semantics and usage guidelines. For a 4-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, the description leaves ambiguity around query/category/provider, making it incomplete for reliable 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It only implicitly references allowOnline via 'when enabled', but does not explain query, category, or provider. The agent must guess that query is the component name and category/provider are filters, which is not explicitly stated.

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 uses a specific verb 'Resolve' and specifies the resource 'architecture component' to an output 'safe embedded SVG', and mentions the resolution order (bundled vs online). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_themes or validate_drawio, as none of those perform resolution.

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 implies usage (when you need an SVG for a component) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or the availability of list_assets for browsing assets. There is no 'instead of' guidance.

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