export_spacing_tokens

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'export all spacing values' and does not disclose the output structure, the meaning of 'all', or how the optional format parameter affects the result. 'Export' implies a non-destructive read operation, but little else is revealed.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the action and target resource.

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 one optional parameter, the schema adequately documents the format. However, the description leaves ambiguity about the scope of 'all spacing values' (local styles, variables, raw values?) and provides no information about the output shape, which matters given there is no output schema.

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 already documents the single format parameter with an enum and default value, achieving 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, but the schema fully covers this simple parameter.

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 names a specific action ('export') and a specific resource ('all spacing values...spacing token system'). It also distinguishes itself from adjacent sibling tools like export_tokens, export_color_palette, and export_typography by focusing on spacing tokens.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description: use this when you need spacing tokens. However, the description never explicitly states when to prefer this over alternatives like export_tokens or generate_stylesheet, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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