resolve_theme_tokens

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Queries' and 'returns all design tokens' imply a read-only operation with an output, which is appropriate for a simple lookup tool. It stops short of explicitly stating no side effects or mentioning error behavior, but the non-mutating nature is reasonably clear.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then use case, then examples. Every sentence contributes meaning without unnecessary repetition or fluff.

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 description explains the tool's core purpose and gives examples, but there is no output schema and the description does not describe the return structure. The sibling tool resolve_v4_theme_variables suggests a possible version distinction (v3 vs v4) that is not addressed, leaving some ambiguity about which Tailwind versions are supported.

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 adds value by providing concrete namespace examples ('colors', 'colors.brand', 'spacing') and clarifies that namespace is a 'dot-path,' which helps the agent understand the parameter semantics beyond the 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Queries the resolved Tailwind CSS theme for a specific namespace and returns all design tokens.' It clearly identifies what the tool does and differentiates it from siblings like get_config_summary by focusing on resolved token values for a named namespace.

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 before generating components to discover what colors, spacing, or font values actually exist in this project.' This is clear guidance on when to invoke the tool, though it does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives.

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