gimp_resize_canvas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is partially covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond them: new canvas area defaults to transparent unless 'fill' is supplied. It does not address permissions, reversibility, or how existing layers are affected.

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?

Two tight sentences, no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the 'fill' detail. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and 0% schema coverage across 5 params, the description is too thin: it never explains the anchor enum (which determines where content sits when canvas grows/shrinks) or image_id. An agent could resize but would be guessing about anchoring and targeting.

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% for 5 parameters, so the description must carry the load. It explains only 'fill' (color to fill new space), leaving width, height, anchor, and image_id completely undocumented despite anchor being an important behavioral control.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Cambia el tamaño del lienzo') and adds the critical qualifier 'sin escalar el contenido', which contrasts with the sibling gimp_scale_image. It is clear, though it does not explicitly name the sibling it differs from.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'sin escalar el contenido' hints that this is the tool to choose when the pixel content should not be resampled, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement or named alternative such as gimp_scale_image or gimp_crop.

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