extract_styles

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It describes the scanning behavior (CSS custom properties and SCSS variables) and what it extracts (colors, spacing, typography). No misleading or contradictory statements; indicates a read-only extraction operation.

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 sentences, front-loaded with action, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage guidance, and scanning behavior.

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?

No output schema, but description explains what is extracted (colors, spacing, typography) and scanning patterns. Parameter count is low and all optional. Missing details on output structure, but sibling tools imply further processing.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter meanings implicitly (e.g., stylePaths for scanning, outputFormat for output format) but doesn't add significant detail beyond schema descriptions.

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 it extracts design tokens from CSS and SCSS files, specifying the resource and verb. It distinguishes from siblings by detailing reverse-engineering of colors, spacing, typography, and scanning for CSS custom properties and SCSS variables.

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 usage context: 'Use when project has styles but no design tokens.' While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the guidance is clear and actionable for when to invoke this tool.

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