Resize a texture

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully adds behavioral detail the schema cannot express: nearest-neighbour resampling and the coupling of UV dimensions to the new size unless keep_uv is set. However, it says nothing about whether the resize is destructive to source resolution, permission requirements, or undo behavior, leaving the mutation profile largely opaque.

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 compact sentences with the core action front-loaded and the conditional caveat trailing. No filler, every clause carries information.

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 texture-mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the essential mechanics (interpolation, UV handling) but omits the 'target' semantics and any note on persistence, reversibility, or return value. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 partially does: keep_uv's effect is explained and width/height are self-evident, but 'target' (the identifier of which texture to resize) is never clarified, and uv_width/uv_height are mentioned despite not appearing in the schema, which may confuse rather than clarify.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Resize the texture image') and even names the resampling method (nearest neighbour), which distinguishes it from sibling texture tools like bb_create_texture or bb_set_texture_properties. It stops short of explicitly routing the agent away from those siblings, but the purpose is unmistakable.

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?

There is no guidance on when to resize versus alternatives such as bb_set_texture_properties, nor any prerequisites or side-effect warnings. The only conditional ('unless keep_uv is true') describes a parameter effect, not when to choose this tool over another.

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