Find or verify lucide icons

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses alias resolution with deprecation flags, the output fields (canonical name, import identifier, tag/category context), and the registry's role (no icon components; lucide-react is the icon layer). This adds substantial behavioral context.

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 two dense sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core promise, then covers modes, output, and dependency information efficiently.

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 read-only lookup tool, the description covers required mode constraints, output characteristics, alias behavior, and ecosystem context (lucide-react version). No important information appears missing.

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 schema already documents all parameters thoroughly (100% coverage). The description adds value by clarifying how the modes interact (at least one required, names wins over query/category) and what query searches (name, tags, categories).

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 finds or verifies lucide-react icon names, with specific modes (query, names, category). The title and description align, and the focus on icon names distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_components.

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?

Usage is implied through the value proposition 'never guess an icon import' and the description of three modes. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the sibling tools or provide exclusions.

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