gimp_crop

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows the safety profile. The description adds the crop-mode context but omits that cropping discards pixels outside the region and says nothing about how image_id selects the target image.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and then branches into the three modes. No filler, though the parenthetical lists make it slightly dense.

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 7-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers most parameters well but leaves image_id undefined and does not clarify mode exclusivity or interaction (e.g., what happens if x/y are omitted while to_selection is false).

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it names and explains six of the seven parameters (x, y, width, height, to_selection, autocrop) with their roles. Only image_id is left unexplained, a minor gap against a 0% baseline.

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 (recorta/crop) and resource (imagen/image) and enumerates three distinct crop modes. It is distinguishable from siblings like gimp_resize_canvas and gimp_scale_image, though it does not explicitly name them as alternatives.

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 three modes (rectangle, to_selection, autocrop) imply how each is triggered, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement about which mode takes precedence, and no mention of prerequisites such as needing an active selection or open image.

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