Get Design Tokens

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

The description only states the core exporting behavior and formats, but does not disclose output structure, side effects, authentication needs, or whether the operation is read-only. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full transparency burden and falls short.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the verb and resource without any filler. It is concise and well-structured, though it sacrifices detail for brevity.

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 three optional parameters and no output schema, yet the description does not explain parameter meanings or expected return values. It provides only a high-level purpose and is insufficient for an agent to fully understand how to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description mentions the format options, which maps to the 'format' enum, but does not explain the meaning of 'tokenType' or 'includeDocumentation'. With 0% schema description coverage, this leaves two of three parameters unexplained, providing insufficient guidance for correct invocation.

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 states a specific action (Export), a clear resource (Material 3 design tokens), and supported formats (CSS, SCSS, JSON, JavaScript). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like get_component_code or generate_theme_from_color, which target other aspects of Material 3.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions under which other tools like generate_theme_from_color might be more appropriate.

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