Exportiere Design Tokens

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior, but it only says 'exports' without stating whether this downloads files, returns a payload, triggers side effects, or requires special permissions. This leaves the operation's actual behavior completely unspecified.

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 sentence with the verb upfront and no fluff. It is efficiently worded, though it omits mention of the default format (json) and result behavior, which would improve completeness without adding length.

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?

Despite having only one parameter, the tool lacks an output schema and annotations, so the description should explain what the export returns (e.g., file download, JSON array, or URL). The current text leaves this ambiguous, making it incomplete for a tool that produces artifacts.

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 schema covers the single parameter with a description ('Export-Format') and an enum of four formats, giving 100% coverage. The tool description only repeats the idea of 'various formats' and adds no new meaning beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score.

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 ('exports') and specific resource ('all design tokens (colors, fonts, spacing)'), plus the available output formats. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve individual design values (e.g., design_get_typography) by emphasizing bulk export.

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?

No explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The phrase 'alle Design Tokens' implies a bulk-export scenario, but there is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to similar tools like design_generate_css_variables.

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