Get Design Asset Content

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'safe design assets' and examples but does not disclose behavior for unsafe assets, error conditions, return format, or authentication needs. Incomplete for a tool with no annotation support.

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?

Single sentence efficiently conveys purpose with examples. No wasted words, appropriately 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?

Simple tool with 1 parameter and no output schema. Description covers basic functionality but lacks details on response format, error handling, or constraints. Sufficient for low complexity but could be more complete.

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 coverage is 100% with 'assetId' fully described (string, minLength, 'Asset id or collection item id.'). Description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'inline text content', and scope 'for safe design assets such as catalog SVGs, uploaded SVGs, and Markdown files'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like get_design_asset (metadata) and get_design_asset_download_url (URL).

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?

Implies usage when text content from safe assets is needed, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No contrast with alternatives such as get_design_asset or search tools. Prerequisites (e.g., asset type must be one of listed) are not stated.

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