get_diagram_preview

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavioral traits. The word 'preview' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly state that no modifications occur, does not mention error handling, file requirements, or output formatting. It adds minimal behavioral insight beyond the basic function.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the purpose. It contains no fluff or redundant phrasing, making it highly efficient.

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 simple tool with two well-documented parameters and a clear purpose, the description is adequate. It does not explain return values in detail, but given the straightforward nature of a text preview and the absence of an output schema, it is sufficiently complete. However, it could benefit from a note about line limits or file path expectations.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (filePath and maxLines). The description adds no extra semantic detail beyond saying 'text preview,' which slightly informs the maxLines parameter but does not go beyond what the schema already explains.

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 'Get a text preview of a Monodraw diagram file' clearly uses the verb 'Get' with a specific resource (text preview) and object (Monodraw diagram file). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like export_diagram (export to image), export_diagram_json, and open_in_monodraw, which serve different purposes.

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 for quickly viewing diagram content as text, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like export_diagram or open_in_monodraw. There are no exclusions or alternative references, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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