generate_component_example

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

The description discloses that the output is HTML/CSS, framework-agnostic, and follows UX best practices. Without annotations, this provides minimal behavioral insight but lacks details on side effects or constraints.

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?

Single sentence, concise, front-loads the core action. No unnecessary words.

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?

For a tool with 3 simple parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and output nature. Could mention if example is returned as code or live preview.

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%, and the description adds no new meaning to parameters beyond their schema descriptions. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 generates a 'framework-agnostic HTML/CSS example' for a 'specific pattern', which is a distinct purpose among siblings. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from tools like 'suggest_pattern' or 'generate_wireframe'.

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 versus alternatives. The description implies use for generating examples, but doesn't specify contexts or exclusions.

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