get_pattern

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the returned content (do's, don'ts, evidence, checklists) and listing supported pattern types, which goes beyond 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 sentence that communicates the core purpose and enumerates pattern types. It is front-loaded but slightly lengthy due to the enumeration. No wasted words.

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?

The description explains the return content (do's, don'ts, evidence, checklists) and covers the purpose and supported pattern types. Without an output schema, this is sufficient. Missing details like pagination or result limits, but overall complete.

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% with descriptive text for each parameter. The description lists pattern types but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema's enum definitions. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 proven UI/UX patterns for a specific design type, listing many pattern types. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_principles or get_business_strategy.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lists pattern types but does not explain context or exclusions. Sibling tools include many other 'get' tools, so usage guidance is needed.

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