delimit_design_extract_tokens

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that no API keys are needed, the tool scans local files, and Figma integration auto-activates based on token presence. This provides sufficient behavioral insight for a read tool.

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 that are front-loaded with the main purpose. No redundant words; every sentence adds value. The structure is efficient and clear.

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?

Covers purpose, key behavioral traits, and conditional integration. Output format is covered by the output schema. Could mention that it reads from the project directory, but overall complete for a tool with well-documented parameters and output schema.

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%, but description adds context that is not in the schema, such as the auto-activation logic for figma_file_key and the implication that token_types correspond to common design tokens. This enriches understanding beyond the schema.

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?

Description starts with a specific verb 'Extract design tokens' and clearly identifies sources (CSS/SCSS/Tailwind config and Figma). It distinguishes itself from sibling design tools like delimit_design_component_library by focusing specifically on token extraction.

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?

Description explains it works without API keys by scanning local files, and details Figma integration auto-activation conditions. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use, it provides clear context for when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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