Get Component Props

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the output contents (names, types, descriptions) but does not disclose any edge cases, auth requirements, or limitations. This is a baseline level of additional behavioral context.

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 concise sentence that directly states the action and result. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function, and there is no unnecessary filler.

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 simple read-only getter with one parameter and strong annotations, the description is mostly complete. It indicates the returned data includes names, types, and descriptions, but does not explicitly state the return format (e.g., array vs object). This is a minor gap 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?

The input schema fully explains the single 'component' parameter with a description and examples, so schema coverage is 100%. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond what the schema already provides, aligning with the baseline score for complete schema coverage.

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 it retrieves all props for a component, naming the resource ('props') and the scope ('for a component'). It also previews the return contents (names, types, descriptions). Sibling tool names (e.g., get_component_events, get_components_variables) make the distinction apparent by topic.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like get_component_events or get_components_variables are not mentioned, and there are no exclusions or context hints about choosing this tool.

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