Preview Mapbox Style Tool

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which the description aligns with ('Generate preview URL'). Beyond annotations, the description adds context about using an existing public token, and the accessToken parameter description clarifies that secret tokens cannot be used—a behavioral constraint not in annotations.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's core function.

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 simple URL-generation tool with no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It could optionally state the return value (e.g., 'Returns a preview URL'), but the purpose is clear from the title and description.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The main description does not add parameter meanings beyond the schema; the only extra context ('using an existing public token') is already covered by the accessToken parameter description.

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's action (generate preview URL) and resource (Mapbox style), with a specific condition (using existing public token). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like geojson_preview_tool and style_builder_tool by focusing solely on style preview.

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 preview but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It does mention the token requirement but lacks comparison with siblings like update_style_tool or create_style_tool.

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