Get one design token

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is clear. Description adds value beyond annotations by specifying return format (name, type, value) and error behavior (close matches). No contradictions.

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?

Two concise sentences with maximum information density. Critical details (purpose, example, return type, error behavior, sibling reference) are front-loaded. No fluff or repetition.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with comprehensive annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, how to use it, what it returns, and how to handle errors. No missing information given the tool's simplicity.

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 has 100% coverage with a detailed description of the 'name' parameter. The description adds a concrete example ('color.primary') and hints at error behavior, but schema already fully documents the parameter structure and constraints.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Get a single design token by its dot-path name' with a concrete example. It distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning tokens_list and error handling for close matches.

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?

Provides clear when-to-use guidance with example dot-path, and when-not-to-use by suggesting tokens_list if the name is unknown. The error message behavior adds context for alternative action.

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