extract_palette

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Clearly states mutation ('writes the resulting palette to the sprite and returns it. NOTE: mutates the sprite's palette'), RGB mode requirement, and return format. Lacks error or edge-case details but covers core behavior.

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?

Concise, front-loaded with purpose, then differentiation, side effects, then args. Every sentence adds value. No redundancy.

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?

Covers input parameters well, explains behavior (mutation, RGB mode), provides return format. No output schema, but return format given. Missing error handling or file existence info, but adequate for a 3-param tool.

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% (no descriptions in schema). Description includes 'Args' section explaining each parameter: filename (Aseprite file to modify), max_colors (cap 1-256, fewer if art has fewer), with_alpha (include alpha). Adds meaning beyond schema titles and types.

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 'Build an OPTIMAL palette from the sprite via native ColorQuantization.' Immediately contrasts with sibling quantize_to_palette, clarifying it does true extraction. Specifies it writes palette to sprite and returns it, with RGB mode requirement.

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?

Explicitly differentiates from quantize_to_palette (nearest-snap vs true extraction). Notes prerequisite (RGB mode) and that it mutates the sprite, implying usage when a new palette is needed. Could mention when not to use (e.g., read-only scenarios) but sufficient.

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