resize_image

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the operation and parameter types. It does not reveal whether the original image is modified in place or a new image is returned, nor how conflicting parameters (scale vs. width/height, maintain_aspect) are resolved.

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 sentence of about ten words, front-loading the main verb and resource without any filler. It is appropriately concise for a straightforward tool.

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?

Because the input schema thoroughly documents every parameter and an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain all details. However, it omits a decision rule for choosing between scale and width/height and does not state whether resizing is destructive, which an agent would need to invoke the tool safely and correctly.

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 schema describes all parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds a high-level mapping between 'dimensions' (width/height) and 'scale factor' (scale), but does not explain parameter precedence or the interaction with maintain_aspect beyond what the schema already says.

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 operation ('Resize the image') and the two supported modes ('by dimensions or scale factor'), distinguishing it from siblings like rotate_image or flip_image. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the core action is specific enough for an agent to identify the intended use.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as crop_image or flip_image. The only usage signal is the verb 'Resize', so the agent must infer appropriateness from the tool name and context rather than from any explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instruction.

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