crop_sprite

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

The description implies the canvas is permanently cropped but does not explicitly state destructive behavior, undo capabilities, or effects on layers. Without annotations, the description carries the burden but offers marginal additional context.

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 clearly communicates the tool's function with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool's simplicity, the description is mostly complete but lacks details on what happens to the cropped-away area, layer handling, or whether the operation is reversible. The presence of sibling tools like trim_sprite suggests more context could help.

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?

The description lists the parameters (x, y, width, height) but does not clarify their coordinate system (e.g., top-left origin) or the meaning of 'filename'. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds minimal value beyond parameter names.

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 uses a specific verb ('Crop') and resource ('the canvas') and explicitly mentions the rectangle parameters (x, y, width, height). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like resize_canvas or trim_sprite.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., trim_sprite). There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring a sprite to be open, or when cropping is preferable over other operations.

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