resize_design_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It partially discloses behavior by describing fill, fit, and original modes, but omits the 'adapt' mode and does not clarify whether the resize mutates the document in-place, affects all pages, or returns a new document. This is a moderate 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 compact and well-structured, with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence and mode behaviors in the second. Every sentence provides useful information without 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 complex tool with a nested document object and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It does not explain the return value, side effects, whether all pages are resized, or the meaning of the 'adapt' mode, leaving significant behavioral gaps for an agent.

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 input schema already provides descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage), including mode semantics that are nearly identical to the tool description. The description adds only a condensed restatement and omits 'adapt', providing little extra meaning beyond 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's purpose with a specific verb ('Resize') and resource ('design document'), and explains the primary modes (fill, fit, original), distinguishing it from sibling tools like autolayout or arrange layers. The action and target are 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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool (to resize a design document) and explains the behavior of the key modes, guiding mode selection. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions relative to sibling tools like autolayout_design_document.

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