resize

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the nearest-neighbor resampling for scale mode and anchor options for canvas mode, but it omits whether the operation mutates or overwrites a file, permission needs, and any return behavior.

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 extremely compact and packs useful syntax into one line, but the pseudo-BNF format is cryptic and lacks a plain-language lead. It is concise but not well structured for quick agent comprehension.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain path semantics and mutation behavior. It only partially covers mode-specific parameters and leaves essential context missing for safe invocation.

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 compensate. It explains the mode enum and mode-specific options (factor, width/height, anchor), which is valuable, but it never explains the required 'path' parameter or its relation to input/output.

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 tool name 'resize' plus the scale/canvas syntax implies an image/canvas resize operation, but the description never states a clear verb and resource. It does not differentiate from sibling tools or explicitly identify what is being resized (sprite, canvas, file).

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 lists mode-specific options but gives no guidance on when to choose 'scale' versus 'canvas'. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives mentioned.

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