select_by_color

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

The 'magic wand style' hint suggests region-growing behavior, but the description does not disclose details like what happens if no match is found, selection boundary behavior, or performance characteristics. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the burden and provides minimal additional context.

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, concise sentence that packs essential information. However, it could benefit from a slightly more structured format or additional context, such as a comparison to similar tools.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a reasonable overview but lacks details on selection expansion logic and edge cases. It is adequate but not thorough.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter-level information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Select cells') and the method ('magic wand style'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'select_rectangle' and 'clear_selection'. The reference to matching specific criteria aligns with the parameters provided.

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 implies usage via the 'magic wand' metaphor but does not explicitly compare to alternative selection tools or provide criteria for when to use this tool over others. No exclusions or contexts are mentioned.

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