get_component_capabilities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses important behavioral traits: the default returns the full matrix, filters narrow the matrix, and 'component' returns a single entry. It does not describe the output shape but conveys the operational semantics well.

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?

One sentence delivers the purpose, default behavior, and parameter usage without any redundant words. It is front-loaded with the core concept and efficiently structured.

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 the key invocation patterns (default, filters, single component) in a compact form. It lacks explicit output format details, but given the absence of an output schema and the tool's self-descriptive nature, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The description explains that booleans serve as filters and component is for a single entry, adding meaning beyond the sparse schema (only component has a description). It doesn't detail each boolean's interpretation, but the names are self-explanatory and the filtering role is clear.

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 identifies the tool as 'DS capability introspection' and explains it returns a full matrix by default with optional filters for single components. It differentiates from siblings like get_component by focusing on capability flags (rscSafe, clientOnly, etc.) rather than component details or props.

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?

It provides clear usage context: use for a full matrix of capabilities, or narrow by passing filter flags or a single component. Although it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the behavior is well-specified with the 'or' distinction for component vs. filters.

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