diagnose_styling

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the generated guide's contents (token prefix, theming, dark mode, anti-patterns, snippets), giving adequate behavioral context for a diagnostic tool. No side effects or destructive actions are implied.

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: first clearly defines output, second gives usage context. Every word adds value; no fluff or redundancy.

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 sufficiently describes the output structure. It could mention error cases (e.g., missing tagName) but is otherwise complete for a diagnostic guide.

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%, so the description adds minimal value beyond default schema descriptions. It provides an example tagName ('sl-button'), which is helpful but not essential.

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 'Generates a Shadow DOM styling guide' and lists specific elements (token prefix, theming approach, dark mode support, anti-pattern warnings, CSS snippets), distinguishing it from sibling tools that perform specific checks rather than generating a comprehensive guide.

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 explicitly says 'Use this before writing any component CSS to prevent Shadow DOM mistakes,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the sibling tools cover alternative use cases.

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