import_psd_to_spine

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

The description discloses the return format (JSON with project_path, atlas_path, png_path, animations) and the animation parameter structure, which is useful. However, it does not mention potential side effects, permissions, error handling, or behavior for missing parameters out_dir and name.

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 brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value 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?

Although output schema exists, the description omits details for two of four parameters and does not cover prerequisites, output file locations, or error conditions, leaving 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for psd_path (layer naming convention) and animations (object structure and default behavior). This is valuable, but out_dir and name are left undocumented.

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 converts a layered PSD into a Spine 4.2 project and generates animations, specifying the resource and expected output. This distinguishes it from siblings like animate_existing.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (siblings) is provided. The description implies its use for converting PSDs but does not state when not to use it.

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