brand_extract_pdf

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It details the extraction method (text extraction, pattern matching), side effects (writes to core-identity.yaml, updates source-catalog.json), and priority rules (guidelines outrank web). Minor gap: no mention of error handling or permissions, but 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 appropriately sized (6 sentences) with no redundancy. Each sentence serves a purpose: action, input type, method, output, priority, usage guidance. Front-loaded with the core action.

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, the description fully explains what is extracted and where results go. It also covers integration with sibling tools and post-extraction steps. No missing critical information for a 2-parameter 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 is 100% so baseline is 3. Description adds context beyond schema: clarifies that file_path is a 'local file path' (schema only says 'Path'), and explains that pages parameter supports ranges and default 'all'. Also describes what values are extracted (hex colors, fonts, sizes) which gives semantic meaning.

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 verb 'Extract' and the resource 'brand colors, typography, spacing, and guideline rules from a PDF brand guidelines document'. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings like brand_extract_web and brand_extract_figma.

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 explicit when to use: 'Use when the user has brand guidelines as a PDF file', when-not: 'NOT for website extraction', and alternatives: 'use brand_extract_web', 'use brand_extract_figma'. Also gives sequencing advice with other tools.

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