Optimize Lenis Performance

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds valuable context about the return format (prioritized list with code examples) and input examples, which exceeds the annotation coverage without contradictions.

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 concise and well-structured: a single sentence summary followed by Args, Returns, and Examples sections. Every part adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 the 3 parameters with full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the description fully explains the tool's behavior, inputs, and output format (prioritized list with code examples). Examples illustrate typical use cases, making it complete.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds examples for setup_description (e.g., 'React app with 50 GSAP animations') and clarifies the default values and return structure, providing extra meaning 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?

The description clearly states it provides performance optimization recommendations for Lenis setups, with specific verb 'provides' and resource 'performance optimization recommendations'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like debugging or setup generation by focusing solely on optimization.

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 implies usage for performance optimization but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternative sibling tools (e.g., debug vs. optimize). No when-not guidance is provided.

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