scan_aceternity_component

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

Without annotations, the description should fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not explain side effects (e.g., overwriting existing components), network requirements, or storage details. The description is too minimal.

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 one short sentence (11 words), but it is concise and front-loaded. It could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 and no annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the scanning process, storage behavior, or what happens when the optional URL is not provided. More context is needed for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides about parameters; it only reinforces the source (Aceternity UI), which is already implicit in the tool name.

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 scans an Aceternity UI component page and stores the component. The verb 'scan' is clear and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_aceternity_component_prompt' and 'scan_shadcn_component'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, fallback logic for optional URL, or recommendations for choosing between scanning and other tools.

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