list_design_primitives

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Lists' correctly implies a safe read-only operation, and 'with their props' hints at return content beyond the names, but there is no mention of output shape, formatting, or any auth/limits context.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the action first and the enumerated contents second. The parenthetical name list is long but directly useful for selection; only minor trimming is possible.

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 parameterless listing tool with no output schema, the description covers what is listed and mentions that props accompany each item, which is adequate for calling it correctly. It stops short of describing the returned prop structure, but nothing else is missing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. There is nothing about parameters for the description to clarify or obscure.

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?

States a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('React design primitives') and enumerates the exact set returned, so an agent knows precisely what comes back. It is clearly distinguishable from the parallel sibling list_creative_archetypes and from get_design_rules.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus get_design_rules, list_creative_archetypes, or render_carousel_project, nor any prerequisite or sequencing guidance. Usage is only implied by the name and the enumeration.

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