Get Dev Kit Component Markup

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, and the description adds useful context beyond that: markup is extracted from Storybook via CI snapshot, and omitting the variant returns the default (first) variant. This provides meaningful behavioral information without contradicting the annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then concise supporting details. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only retrieval tool with an output schema and good annotations, the description covers purpose, source, and default behavior. It is largely complete, though it could mention how this tool differs from the bsi_get_component_markup sibling.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that variant is optional and defaults to the first variant, which supplements the schema's parameter description.

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 states the tool returns HTML markup for a specific variant of a Dev Kit Italia web component, using a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly distinguish this from the similar sibling bsi_get_component_markup, so it is clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 when you need markup for a particular variant, and explains the default behavior when variant is omitted. However, it does not state when to choose this tool over alternatives like bsi_get_component_markup or devkit_list_component_variants.

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