list_components

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 discloses that the tool returns slugs matching path segments on the docs site. However, it does not detail the output format (e.g., JSON structure) or any ordering/consistency guarantees. The behavior is straightforward but could be slightly more explicit.

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 three concise sentences, each serving a clear purpose: stating function, version scope, and usage order with slug explanation. No waste.

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, the description could explicitly state the return format (e.g., array of objects with name and slug). It implies the output provides slugs but does not fully describe it. For a simple list tool with clear usage, it is mostly 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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details, and it doesn't. No additional value is required here.

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 explicitly states it lists all HeroUI v2 components, distinguishes from v3, and clarifies it provides slugs for sibling tools. This is a specific verb+resource with clear differentiation from get_docs and other tools.

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 explicitly instructs 'Always call this first' to obtain slugs for get_component_docs and other tools. It also clarifies which version the MCP covers, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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