List resolution presets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by mentioning 'Answers immediately' (latency trait) and specifying the content covered (presets, fit modes, focus points), which gives the agent expectations about response scope beyond the annotations.

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: the first states the tool's purpose, the second provides usage context and latency. Every sentence earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the key verb and resource. No wasted words.

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 listing tool with zero parameters and an output schema, the description is fully adequate. It tells what will be listed, when to use it, and what to expect (immediate answer). The output schema handles return value details, so nothing is missing.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema description already states 'No arguments; lists the built-in presets.' The description does not need to add parameter details. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and this description appropriately leaves parameter semantics to 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 clearly states the tool lists 'named resolution presets, fit modes and focus points' that resize_video accepts, which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like resize_video itself. The verb 'List' combined with the resource makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides clear usage context: 'Use it when you want to name a target platform rather than work out its pixel dimensions.' This implies when to use it, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or methods, and the 'Answers immediately' note is more of a behavioral trait than a usage guideline. Still, the guidance is strong enough for an agent to decide appropriately.

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