get_components

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

No annotations provided, but description implies read-only 'list' behavior. Discloses that variants are included, adding value beyond schema. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences: first states action, second gives usage context. No fluff, front-loaded.

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?

Description covers purpose and usage context. No output schema, but mentions 'variants' to hint at return content. Could be more explicit about return format, but sufficient for a list 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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. Description does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond schema. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Clearly states verb 'list', resource 'components in a Penpot file', and includes 'with their variants'. Distinguishes from siblings like get_tokens and get_constraints.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use to understand available building blocks before generating UI', providing context for when to use. No mention of when-not or alternatives.

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