Whole document

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only, and the description adds valuable behavioral detail: maxDepth truncates with 'childrenOmitted' and hidden nodes are excluded unless includeHidden is set. This goes beyond the annotation and explains edge cases. No contradiction with readOnlyHint or openWorldHint.

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 sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by concise behavior notes on maxDepth and hidden nodes. Every clause contributes meaning.

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 complex tree-returning tool with no output schema, the description gives a high-level view and notes a specific field ('childrenOmitted'), which hints at the return structure. It covers the key behaviors (depth, hidden nodes) but does not detail the full tree/token format. Given readOnlyHint and the sibling tool set, this is reasonably complete.

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%, but the description enriches parameter meaning: it explains maxDepth's depth semantics (0 = root only) and the effect on truncated nodes, and clarifies includeHidden's default and purpose. This adds value beyond the schema's field descriptions.

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 retrieves a 'Normalized design tree together with its tokens' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like vault_get_node (single node) and vault_get_tokens (tokens only) by covering the whole tree. The mention of maxDepth and hidden nodes further clarifies scope.

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 when to use it (when you need the whole document tree and its tokens) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like vault_get_node or vault_get_tokens. It explains how maxDepth and includeHidden alter the result, giving context, but lacks explicit 'use this when' or 'prefer sibling X for Y' guidance.

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