GSAP MatchMedia

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that GSAP auto-reverts animations when the breakpoint stops matching, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention any side effects, permission requirements, or performance implications. Overall, it adds useful but not exhaustive 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 three well-structured sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then provides usage guidance, then distinguishes from a sibling. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description covers the main use case and behavior (auto-revert). It does not explain what happens when no breakpoints match or how the generated code is output. For a code generation tool with simple parameters, it is nearly complete but lacks a minor detail.

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 has 2 parameters with 50% schema description coverage. The description mentions breakpoints and media queries but does not explain the 'includeImports' parameter or provide additional semantics beyond the schema. The description adds minimal value over the schema definitions.

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 generates gsap.matchMedia() code for running different animations per breakpoint/media query. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool gsap_tween by noting 'For a single animation without breakpoints use gsap_tween.'

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('Use when animations need to change based on screen size or prefers-reduced-motion') and when not ('For a single animation without breakpoints use gsap_tween'). No alternative tools are mentioned but the direct sibling differentiation is sufficient.

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