List Material 3 Components

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

The description implies a safe read operation by using 'List' and mentions three filtering behaviors, but it does not disclose pagination, response format, ordering, or how deprecated components are treated (despite the includeDeprecated parameter). With no annotations, more detail on these behavioral aspects would be valuable.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that clearly communicates the purpose and key filters without any filler. It is concise and efficiently structured, though adding a second sentence with usage guidance would not detract from its conciseness.

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?

With 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides only a minimal summary. It does not explain the response structure, handling of deprecated components, or any limitations, leaving significant gaps for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the tool.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only the framework parameter has a description). While the tool description mentions three filters, it omits the includeDeprecated parameter and does not explain defaults or the meaning of complexity levels, failing to compensate for the schema's lack of clarity.

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 the specific verb 'List' and clearly identifies the resource as 'available Material 3 components,' while also mentioning the key filtering dimensions (category, complexity, framework). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that retrieve code, icons, tokens, or guidelines.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as suggesting 'get_component_code' for code snippets or 'search_material_icons' for icon lookup. It simply states what it does without contextual recommendations or exclusions.

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