Get Design Documents

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is already covered. The description adds that results come as 'document bundles,' which hints at the return shape, but says nothing about pagination, permissions, or availability of each bundle type.

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 with no filler; the verb and resource come first and the examples of document kinds follow efficiently.

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 only two fully documented required parameters, no nested objects, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description supplies what an agent needs to select the tool. The lack of usage context relative to siblings is the only real shortfall.

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 100%, with both parameters documented and documentKind constrained by an enum, so the baseline is 3. The description only loosely restates the document kinds already enumerated in the schema and adds no format or constraint detail beyond it.

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?

States a specific verb (Fetch) and resource (design application document bundles) and enumerates representative document kinds (amendment, refusal reason, decision packages). This lets an agent distinguish it from get_design_registration and get_trademark_documents, though it never explicitly names which sibling to prefer.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives are named. The documentKind enum implies the tool is selected by document type, but the description does not state this or when to reach for it over the many sibling tools.

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