lanhu_design

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the unified nature, modes, and special URL handling. However, it does not mention any side effects, authentication needs, or rate limits, which would be helpful.

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 well-structured with a clear overview, bulleted modes, and a concise note on detailDetach URLs. Every sentence is informative and earns its place.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential functionality well. It could mention what each mode returns, but the modes are self-explanatory. The lack of output schema is compensated by the detailed mode descriptions.

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%, so the description adds value beyond schema by explaining the relationship between modes and parameters, especially design_names requirement for analyze/slices/tokens and include default. It also explains special URL formats.

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 'Unified Lanhu design tool' and lists four distinct modes (list, analyze, slices, tokens), each with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings lanhu_page and lanhu_resolve_invite_link by focusing on design-level operations.

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 explains when to use each mode and mentions special handling for detailDetach URLs with design_names='all'. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives for overlapping functionality.

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