create_text_style

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

Annotations provide no destructive hint but the description adds context: font is loaded before assignment, explains units behavior for lineHeight and letterSpacing, and notes the return format. No contradictions with annotations.

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 efficient with no wasted words: first sentence states purpose, second adds font loading behavior, third covers units, fourth provides alternative, fifth mentions return structure. Well-organized and to the point.

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?

Given the complexity (6 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers main purpose, key behavioral details, and return format. It omits some param specifics (e.g., fontName structure) but the schema provides structure. Mostly complete for the intended use case.

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 description coverage is only 17% (only 'name' has a description). The description compensates by explaining lineHeight and letterSpacing units (including AUTO omits value) and mentions font loading, but does not detail other parameters like fontSize, description, or fontName structure, leaving gaps.

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 a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('reusable local text style'), distinguishes it from sibling tool 'set_text_properties' by noting it's for reusable styles vs one-off formatting, and mentions it can be applied with 'apply_style_to_node'.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (to create a reusable style) and when not to ('For one-off formatting...use set_text_properties instead'), providing a direct alternative.

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