preview_icons

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states that a local HTML preview sheet is created, but does not disclose whether files are written, overwritten, or require permissions, nor any side effects. The agent is left uncertain about the tool's behavior beyond the basic output.

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 sentence with no filler, getting straight to the point. However, it sacrifices necessary details for brevity, though conciseness itself is high.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema or annotations, this description is minimal. It explains the overall purpose but leaves out critical details about parameter usage and expected output, making it incomplete 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?

The schema has zero description coverage, and the description does not mention any parameters. It fails to explain the meaning of 'style' or 'output' parameters, or the expected format of 'names'. The agent must rely entirely on the schema enums and names without additional context.

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 ('Create') and resource ('local HTML preview sheet'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_icon or update_icon. The scope 'for a shortlist of icons' adds further context.

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 a shortlist of icons exists, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like search_icons or audit_icons. No exclusions or alternative references are mentioned.

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