adjust_brightness_contrast

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the parameters and that a status dict is returned, but it does not disclose whether the adjustment is applied in place, whether it is destructive, whether undo is required, or how errors are handled when the layer is missing.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and then presents parameters in a compact, readable list. Every sentence is useful and there is no unnecessary wording.

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 four-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate for invocation because it documents all parameters. It is incomplete for safe and correct tool selection because it omits side-effect behavior, undo expectations, and sibling differentiation.

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, and it does: it documents all four parameters with ranges and defaults, including brightness and contrast from -127 to +127 and layer_name defaulting to the active layer. This adds meaningful invocation detail beyond the bare schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: adjust brightness and contrast of a layer. It clearly identifies the target as a layer, but it does not distinguish this operation from sibling adjustments such as auto_levels, adjust_curves, adjust_hue_saturation, or adjust_color_balance.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention alternatives like auto_levels or adjust_curves, nor does it explain when a caller should choose this tool over other tonal adjustment tools.

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