canvas_set_dimensions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden for what is a mutation tool. It never states whether resizing crops, scales, or repositions existing layers, whether it requires any permission, or whether changes are reversible — all material for a destructive-ish canvas operation.

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 tight sentence with the core action front-loaded and the preset list as useful detail. No filler, though the parenthetical preset list borders on dense.

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 3-param zero-required mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition is only partially complete. It documents presets but omits the parameter-interaction rule (does preset override width/height?) and any behavioral effects on existing content.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters, making 3 the baseline. The description adds preset names (Instagram Post, Story, etc.) that map dims to intent, but it leaves the critical preset-vs-width/height precedence rule unexplained.

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 (changes/sets) and resource (canvas dimensions), and concretely enumerates the preset options with their meanings. It is clearly distinguishable from sibling canvas mutators like canvas_set_gradient or canvas_set_background, though it never explicitly names an alternative.

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 when-to-use guidance is offered: nothing tells the agent when to pass a preset versus explicit width/height, or whether this belongs with canvas_create_new for a new design. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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