resize_image_for_platform

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not say whether the original image is preserved or overwritten, whether the operation costs credits, whether the result is a new generation stored in the library, or what happens when the source aspect ratio already matches the target.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of the behavioral and usage detail noted elsewhere rather than being a model of tight completeness.

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 mutation tool with zero annotations and no output schema, the description should say what comes back (a URL, a generation ID, a library item) and whether the source is modified. None of that is covered, leaving the agent guessing about the side effects of invocation.

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 100%, including a fully enumerated platform list, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds only the framing that the platform maps to an aspect-ratio re-crop, which is helpful but not more than the baseline.

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 pair ('resize and re-crop') and a specific resource ('an image') with a stated goal ('specific social media aspect ratios'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like export_to_social or upscale_photo, though it never explicitly names those neighbors.

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 purpose implies when to use it, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance, no mention of how it relates to export_to_social (does resizing happen as part of export?), and no indication of prerequisites such as the image needing to already exist in the account.

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