Plumb · studio kit (build the component library)

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation), and the description confirms building and placing components. It adds behavioral context: the masters inherit the session palette and type scale. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, what happens on overwrite, or error cases. The added value is acceptable but not exhaustive.

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?

Three concise sentences with no filler. The critical label 'STEP 2' is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value: purpose, behavior, linkage to next step, and prerequisites.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, key behavioral traits (inheritance), and flow context. It lacks explicit mention of return values or error handling, but given the simplicity, it is reasonably 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 only two parameters. The description reinforces the meaning of sessionId (from plumb_studio_start) and implies pageName (onto a named page). It adds marginal context beyond the schema descriptions, meeting the baseline for a well-documented 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 (build) and resource (component library), listing concrete component types (Button, FeatureCard, etc.). It clearly distinguishes itself as STEP 2 in a flow and names the succeeding tool plumb_studio_page, making its role unambiguous relative to siblings.

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 explicitly states it is STEP 2 of the studio flow, requires a sessionId from plumb_studio_start, and advises following with plumb_studio_page. It also mentions the Plumb plugin prerequisite. While it does not give explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, the sequential guidance is clear and actionable.

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