get-story-examples

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose any error behavior, output format details, or limitations (e.g., what happens when no stories exist). It adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 that efficiently states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It follows a clear structure: action, object, and target component.

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?

With three parameters and no output schema, the description provides a basic understanding of purpose but does not elaborate on return enrichments, edge cases, or prerequisites. Given the presence of closely related sibling tools, this minimal description may be insufficient for an agent to confidently select the correct tool in all contexts.

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 input schema fully describes all three parameters with 100% coverage, including 'storyName' optionality and 'framework' enum. The description adds only the context of 'rendered HTML examples', which aligns with componentName but does not enrich the understanding of any individual parameter beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and clearly identifies the resource as 'rendered HTML examples from Storybook stories' for a component. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get-story (likely metadata) and get-component-stories (story list) by focusing on the rendered HTML output.

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 the tool is for retrieving HTML examples, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get-story or get-component-stories. There is no mention of exclusions or conditions, leaving the usage context implicit.

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