jekyll_component_get

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 does add the critical behavioral claim 'Read-only', which is genuinely useful. However it doesn't describe error behavior for a missing component name, normalization side effects (schema covers this) or output format details. Adequate but thin for a read operation with no 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?

Three tight sentences: what it returns, when to use it, and its safety profile. Front-loaded with the action and payload; no filler.

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?

Complete enough for a simple single-param read tool: purpose, payload contents, usage timing, and read-only nature are all covered. Minor gap is that with no output schema the description enumerates fields but doesn't note structure/formatting of the source payloads.

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 100% and there is only one parameter whose schema description already explains normalization ('any case/spacing; normalized to kebab-case'). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Get full details for one component by name'. Explicitly enumerates the returned payload (Liquid/SCSS/JS/docs source, detected parameters, variants, accessibility notes, class names), distinguishing it from jekyll_component_list (plural) and from create/validate/delete siblings.

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?

States when to use it ('before editing or reviewing a component') which implies the workflow relationship with jekyll_component_create/validate. But does not name the alternative (e.g. jekyll_component_list for browsing all components) or state exclusions explicitly.

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