convert_react

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

The description mentions that the user will 'receive the conversion context including migration rules, syntax reference, and examples,' which partially discloses the output format. No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden, but it doesn't discuss edge cases, errors, or limitations, leaving some ambiguity about whether actual converted code is returned or just supporting 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 three sentences plus an Args block, with no filler. The first sentence states the purpose, the second explains the output, and the third lists the parameter—all essential information.

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 tool has a single parameter and an output schema, so the description doesn't need to detail return values. However, the phrase 'conversion context' is somewhat ambiguous—it suggests the tool provides guidance rather than the converted DOMQL directly—and no details on how the conversion is performed or what limitations exist. Overall, it's a minimal viable description but has gaps for a tool with no annotations.

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 has one required parameter, source_code, and the description adds meaning by specifying 'The React/JSX source code to convert,' clarifying the expected input beyond the schema's basic title. With 0% schema coverage, this compensation is adequate.

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 opens with 'Convert React/JSX code to Symbols.app DOMQL,' a specific verb+resource pairing that clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like convert_html and convert_to_json. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 states the required input ('Provide React component code') and the target output, which implies the tool is for React-to-DOMQL conversions. However, it doesn't explicitly compare with convert_html or provide exclusions, so it's clear context but not full guidance.

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