canvas_manage_library

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

Annotations set destructiveHint=false, but the description lists 'delete' as a valid action for brand kits and generated assets, which contradicts the non-destructive hint. This is a direct contradiction, so score is 1 per rules.

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?

Description is well-structured with sections, lists, and an example. It is concise with no filler, front-loads the purpose, and every sentence adds value.

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 tool's complexity (multiple targets, actions, many parameters) and no output schema, the description covers usage guidelines and examples well. It lacks details on return values but is sufficient for an agent to understand core behavior.

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?

Description includes an example and lists actions, but does not explain each parameter's role. Schema description coverage is stated as 0% (though schema actually has descriptions), so the description fails to fully compensate. However, the example provides some context, making it adequate but not exceptional.

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?

Description specifies verb and resource: 'Create, list, search, and inspect brand kits and generated assets.' It clearly distinguishes from siblings by stating 'Do not use when: The user wants to generate or edit images.' Sibling tools include image creation/editing, so this differentiation is effective.

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?

Provides explicit 'Use when' and 'Do not use when' sections, plus lists of supported actions per target. This gives clear context for when to invoke this tool vs alternatives, fulfilling the guideline requirement exceptionally.

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