List Curated Sources

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It adds valuable context by stating that it runs offline and requires no API key, which is not obvious from the schema. However, it does not describe the exact structure of the returned registry list, leaving a minor gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence adds value. It avoids redundancy and clearly communicates purpose, usage, and operational traits.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers purpose, usage, and operational context. The absence of an output schema is offset by the clear statement that it returns the curated source registries, though it could be slightly more explicit about the return format. Overall, it is sufficiently 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?

The schema already fully covers the `category` parameter with an enum and description. The description adds extra meaning by mapping the enum values to design galleries, component libraries, and effect/shader sources, and by explaining that the output feeds the `sources` argument of other tools.

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 lists curated source registries for design galleries, component libraries, and effect/shader sources. It differentiates itself from siblings by explicitly noting it is the way to discover source names for other Kroma tools.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool: to discover exact source names for the `sources` argument of other Kroma tools. It also mentions that it runs offline and requires no API key, covering practical usage constraints.

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