Get icon

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns 'raw SVG markup' and requires an 'exact name', adding some behavioral context. However, it does not mention error handling, case sensitivity, or what happens when an icon is not found, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 two sentences long, front-loads the primary action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place, making it highly 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 that the schema fully documents all parameters and an output schema exists, the description's brevity is acceptable. It clearly conveys the tool's purpose and usage, and the remaining unknowns (such as precise error behavior) are minor for a simple fetch tool.

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 for parameters is 100%, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds meaningful semantic context by explaining that lucide is for 'generic UI icons' and simple-icons for 'brand logos', and by emphasizing 'exact name' for the name parameter. This goes beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 what the tool does: 'Fetch one icon's raw SVG markup by exact name' from two specific icon sets. It distinctly differentiates itself from the sibling tool search_icons by focusing on exact-name retrieval of one icon.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Use search_icons first if the exact name/set isn't already known,' providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus the alternative. This is a direct and useful usage guideline.

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