Preview creating an external TSJ tileset

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description confirms 'without modifying project assets' and adds extra behavioral details: returns an expiring change set, expectedRevision is SHA-256 of prospective bytes, and overwrite prevention. No contradictions.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence conveys the main action, computation, and output; the second adds critical behavioral constraints. Every sentence earns its place.

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 8 parameters and low schema coverage, the description covers the core purpose, formula, return type, and a key constraint. It could mention optional parameters for completeness, but the description suffices for an agent to understand the tool's main behavior.

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 25% (only imagePath and tilesetPath have descriptions). The description adds context for margin/spacing via the Tiled formula and mentions 'existing project image' for imagePath, but does not fully compensate for undocumented parameters like name, className.

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 clearly states the tool 'plans one new external atlas TSJ from an existing project image' using a specific formula, and explicitly distinguishes itself from tiled_create_map as the 'sole direct creation exception.' The verb 'plans' and resource 'external atlas TSJ' are precise.

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 gives context that this tool returns an expiring change set and that apply refuses to overwrite existing destinations, implying it is for previewing not direct creation. It mentions the sibling exception (tiled_create_map), but does not explicitly contrast with other preview tools like tiled_preview_write_tsx.

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