List connected design hosts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists connected hosts, which is a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose details like whether it returns live status, whether it includes disconnected hosts, or any authentication requirements. The description is accurate but minimal.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the action ('List connected design hosts') and specifies the scope (Figma and Adobe XD DesignPort plugins). No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter list tool, the description is mostly complete. However, it doesn't mention what the output looks like (e.g., host names, connection status) or whether there are any prerequisites for hosts to appear. The sibling tools suggest a design context, but the description alone doesn't fully explain when this is useful.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics. The schema is empty and coverage is 100%, meaning there's nothing undocumented. The description correctly implies no input is needed.

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 lists connected design hosts, specifically naming Figma and Adobe XD DesignPort plugins. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like design.list_events or design.get_capabilities, though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative.

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 this is the tool to use when you need to see connected design hosts, and the sibling list shows alternatives like design.get_capabilities for capabilities. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives or provide context on when listing hosts is relevant.

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