mcp__getDesignTexts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explains the key format and that text must be used exactly, but does not mention error handling, rate limits, or consequences of missing keys. Basic behavioral context is present but could be more thorough.

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 well-structured: first paragraph explains context and key mapping, then a bullet list of parameter options. Every sentence is necessary and no fluff. It is efficiently front-loaded.

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 the complexity (text retrieval from a design system), the description covers the workflow, key mapping, and parameter options adequately. It lacks an output schema but describes the return value as original text. Some edge cases (e.g., missing keys) are not addressed, but the core functionality is well explained.

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%, so the bar is higher. The description adds value by explaining when to use each parameter (e.g., shortLink alternative, sourceLayerId override) and the format parameter's use cases. It goes beyond the schema's basic 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 retrieves exact text content for large text nodes after fetching sections, explaining the key mapping and that original text is returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by specifying its role in the workflow (after getDesignSections).

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 tells the agent to call this tool after getDesignSections, provides two calling methods (fileId/layerId or shortLink), and warns against inventing text. It doesn't mention when not to use it relative to siblings, but the workflow guidance is clear.

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