Preview importing a reference image

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it describes deterministic behavior, handling of transparency and null tiles, and failure mode for fully transparent regions. The readOnlyHint is consistent with returning a change set (not applying it). No contradiction.

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 a single, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the main action. It is concise with no redundant information, though slightly lengthy for the level of detail.

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 the output schema (not shown), the description adequately covers key behaviors and edge cases. It explains the return type (change set) and deterministic plan. However, more detail on parameter interdependencies would improve completeness.

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 low (43%), and the description does not detail parameter meanings or constraints beyond the algorithm's overview. Parameters like region, layerId, and palette are not explained, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 title and description clearly state the tool's function: previewing the import of a reference image by resampling it onto a cell grid and converting to palette colors. It is distinct from other tiled preview tools (e.g., tiled_preview_edits, tiled_preview_shape) which handle different tasks.

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 for previewing an image import, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, prerequisites, or when not to use it. No sibling comparisons are provided.

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