replace_color

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'preserving alpha' but does not disclose whether the operation is destructive, if it modifies the file in place, or any side effects like affecting other layers or frames.

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 concise: a single sentence purpose followed by a bullet-list of parameter descriptions. No wasted words, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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 output schema, no annotations, and 6 parameters, the description adequately explains parameters and purpose. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., whether the tool modifies the file, what happens if the color is not found, or any prerequisites).

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%, but the description's args section provides clear explanations for each parameter (e.g., 'Hex color to replace, e.g. "#FF0000"'), adding significant meaning beyond the schema's property names and types.

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 starts with a clear verb 'Replace' and specific resource 'color in a cel, preserving alpha'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'erase_color' (removes color) and 'remap_colors_in_cel_range' (operates on a range).

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 implies usage when replacing a specific color in a cel while preserving alpha, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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