Get helper props

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=true, idempotent=true, destructive=false and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds one useful behavioral constraint — the library's idiom that styling should go through props rather than inline styles — but says nothing about the shape or size of the returned prop set.

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, zero filler. The scope statement comes first and the actionable instruction ('call this BEFORE...') is front-loaded before the rationale.

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 read-only lookup tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the definition is nearly complete: it says what is returned and when to call it. Minor gap is that it does not hint at how large/structured the returned prop list is or whether results are grouped.

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% and the single optional 'group' param is already documented with examples, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by enumerating the areas (spacing, colour, typography, flexbox, visibility) that correspond to the group filter, reinforcing the valid filter vocabulary.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: it returns the helper props every bestax component accepts plus their valid values, with concrete categories (spacing, colour, typography, flexbox, visibility). It is clear on its own, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from close sibling names like get_props or get_css_variables.

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?

Gives an explicit triggering condition: call this BEFORE writing an inline style or utility class by hand, because the library expects those to be props. That is strong context, but it never names an alternative tool (e.g. get_css_variables or lookup_bulma_classes) for agents that genuinely need raw CSS/classes.

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