read_diagram_guide

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of conveying safety and behavior. It uses 'Returns' to indicate a non-mutating read operation and lists the template options, which adds context about what to expect. However, it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or mention error handling, leaving a small 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 long, front-loading the main purpose in the first sentence and listing templates, then adding a critical usage note in the second. Every sentence and detail serves a purpose with no redundancy.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, template options, and invocation order. Minor omissions like the default template or output format are not critical but would make it fully 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 only defines 'template' as a string with no description or enums. The description compensates fully by listing all available template values (base, flowchart, architecture-diagram, etc.), providing the exact semantic meaning expected for the parameter.

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 returns a comprehensive design guide for Excalidraw diagrams, with a specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'design guide'. It lists the available templates, distinguishing it from sibling tools that create or modify elements.

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 explicitly instructs to call this tool BEFORE any create_element or batch_create_elements call, making the usage context and ordering unambiguous. It also implicitly excludes other operations, providing clear when-to-use guidance.

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