imgui_resize_window

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

No annotations are provided, and the description merely restates the obvious mutating action ('resize'). It doesn't disclose whether resizing is immediate or animated, whether it affects child widgets/layout, whether it can be undone, or whether there are constraints on dimensions. For a mutating tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant transparency gap.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately brief for a straightforward operation. However, the brevity comes at the cost of the behavioral detail needed for a mutating tool with no annotations.

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?

This is a mutating window operation with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter enums. The description fails to explain expected behavior: whether dimensions must be positive integers, whether the window needs to exist first (if not, does it throw), what happens if the window is currently animating, or any interaction with layout dependencies. For a tool operating on a managed UI window, more context is warranted.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter ('id', 'w', 'h') having its own description. The schema already provides the baseline for parameter meanings. The tool description itself adds nothing beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb+resource relationship: 'Resize a window to new dimensions'. It distinguishes from siblings like imgui_move_window (which relocates position) and imgui_set_window_visibility (which toggles visibility). The purpose is unambiguous and specific to resizing.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives. There's no mention of interactions with related tools like imgui_set_viewport_size (which resizes the whole viewport) or imgui_set_resolution_preset. The description offers no context on prerequisites, such as whether the window must already exist or whether animations can affect sizing.

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