get_vector

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: agents must open the file instead of recreating paths, outputPath is preferred, and SVG text handling. This provides sufficient transparency for a read-only export tool, though it omits potential side effects like file overwriting.

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 (around 50 words) and well-structured: first sentence states purpose, subsequent sentences provide usage guidance and behavioral notes. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 7 parameters, 3 required, and no output schema, the description covers the core export purpose, preferred usage (outputPath), and SVG handling. It does not detail all output formats or return structures, but the schema fills those gaps adequately.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining outputPath usage ('strongly recommended. Agents open this file instead of copying path data into code') and the behavior of format=svg without outputPath, going beyond schema descriptions.

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 'Exports REAL geometry from the .fig blob (fillGeometry/strokeGeometry commandsBlob)', specifying a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by suggesting 'For multi-asset work use export_asset_pack', indicating its focus on single assets.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Prefer outputPath' and 'For multi-asset work use export_asset_pack'. It also advises on handling SVG output: 'still save/open it rather than rewriting d attributes', covering both typical and edge cases.

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