plan_asset_spec

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

Discloses that Aseprite is not launched, returns dry_run=true manifest, and handles invalid specs with validation report. No annotations provided, so description carries the burden and does well.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, but slightly wordy in first sentence. Almost concise.

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?

Overall adequate for a simple tool with one parameter, but lacks specification details for the 'spec' object, which is important given no output schema.

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%, and the description adds no detail about the 'spec' parameter format or required fields, leaving the agent with minimal guidance.

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?

Clearly states it returns ordered build steps without launching Aseprite, distinguishing it from build_asset_from_spec and validate_asset_spec.

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?

Describes it as a dry-run alternative to build_asset_from_spec, and indicates it returns validation report on invalid input, providing clear context for usage.

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