adjust_hue_saturation

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals parameter units and ranges but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, modifies the file in-place, or requires specific permissions. The behavioral traits are only partially covered.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It efficiently conveys the core operation and parameter limits.

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 tool with 6 parameters, no output schema, and many siblings, the description is minimal but sufficient for basic understanding. It lacks explanation of return value or side effects, making it adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 0%, so description must add value. It explains 'hue' as degrees, 'saturation' and 'lightness' as percent with range, which helps. However, 'frame', 'layer', and 'filename' are left implicit. The description adds useful but incomplete semantic information.

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 adjusts hue (in degrees) and scales saturation/lightness (percent range -100 to 100), providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like adjust_brightness_contrast and desaturate.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., adjust_brightness_contrast, desaturate). There is no mention of prerequisites or alternatives.

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