flatten_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'All layers into a single background layer' does disclose that every layer is collapsed, but it omits that hidden layers are also discarded, that the result is effectively irreversible apart from undo, and whether alpha/transparency is preserved. A precise but incomplete behavioral picture.

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 core sentence is front-loaded and wasteful phrasing is absent. The 'Parameters' and 'Returns' blocks are small, though 'Returns status dict' adds little 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 one-parameter, destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition is minimal but not misleading. It should say more about irreversibility and the return value than 'status dict'.

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%, so the description must compensate; it lists image_index and its default of 0, which matches the schema but adds no interpretation — such as whether the index refers to the position in the image list from list_images or the active image.

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 and resource — 'Flatten all layers into a single background layer' — so the agent knows exactly what operation is performed. It does not differentiate from the sibling merger, merge_visible_layers, which is the most likely competing choice.

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 flatten versus merge_visible_layers, no precondition that an image must exist or be active, and no mention that the operation should be paired with save/export. The only usage hint is the parameter default.

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