List Dev Kit Component Props

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral detail about including subcomponent props and listing specific fields (name, type, description, default, options). This goes beyond the bare annotation without contradicting it.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, and includes a concrete example ('it-accordion-item'). No filler or redundant content.

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 list tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is sufficient. It specifies what is returned, the target components, and the inclusion of subcomponents, leaving no major gaps.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by restricting the 'component' parameter to Dev Kit Italia it-* components and mentioning subcomponent support, which clarifies valid input beyond the schema's simple examples.

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 identifies the tool's action ('Lists all HTML attributes'), the resource ('Dev Kit Italia web component (it-*)'), and the scope ('Includes subcomponent props'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like devkit_list_component_variants by focusing specifically on props.

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 provides clear context on when to use the tool — when you need HTML attributes/props for a Dev Kit component. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the usage scenario is unambiguous due to the focus on props.

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