List WunderUI components

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral burden; it does disclose the returned field set and the plan-based licensing constraint, which is meaningful context. However, it says nothing about result volume, pagination, or whether the list is exhaustive — relevant for an unfiltered inventory call with zero required parameters.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what the inventory is before the filters and the usage directive. Slight overlap with the schema's parameter descriptions, but nothing is padded or wasteful.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description does the needed work: it defines the result shape, the filterable dimensions, the recommended call ordering, and the license constraint. Only missing piece is any sense of result size or pagination for the unfiltered case.

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% and the enum for plan is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description restates the three filter axes (category, plan, query) and adds the free-plan filtering rule, but contributes no additional syntax or matching behavior beyond what the schema already states.

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 names the resource (the WunderUI component inventory) and enumerates the fields returned (name, category, plan, one-line description), so the agent knows exactly what a call produces. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling get_component (singular) or list_templates, leaving that differentiation implicit in the verb 'inventory/list'.

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?

It gives a concrete trigger: 'Call this first to find out whether a component already exists before building one by hand', which establishes ordering relative to hand-building. It also adds a conditional rule ('On the Free plan use only components with plan "free"'). It stops short of naming get_component as the follow-up alternative.

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