list_colors

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It says 'Lists' implying a read operation, but it does not confirm the operation is non-destructive or explain the default behavior that filters to only colors unless 'all' is requested. The phrase 'colors and tints' could mislead an agent into thinking all types are always returned, which is not the case given the schema default.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, and every word contributes to the 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 simple tool, the description covers the basic purpose but leaves out the behavior of the optional parameter and the exact format of the returned list. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description could have explained default filtering and response shape, so completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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% (the only parameter, swatchType, is fully described in the schema). The description adds no additional meaning or usage guidance for the parameter, so it stays at the baseline for high 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 the action (Lists) and the resource (all colors and tints in the active document). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like list_styles and list_frames, and the active-document scope adds precision.

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 the tool is for retrieving swatches but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. An agent would need to infer when to use this versus list_styles, so guidance is only implied, not stated.

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