resize_nodes

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

The annotation indicates readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds behavioral details: non-resizable nodes are skipped and the return shape is { ok, affected }. This goes beyond the basic safety hints.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and outcome. No filler.

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 simple resize operation, the description covers the action, edge case (non-resizable skipped), and return value. Annotations provide safety context. Enough for the agent to select and invoke 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?

Schema coverage is only 33% (nodeIds has a description). The description reiterates 'width × height (positive)' which duplicates the schema's exclusiveMinimum constraint. It does not explain units, allowed node types, or the meaning of 'affected'. Minimal added value beyond schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'resize' with a clear resource ('nodes') and specifies the dimensions ('width × height (positive)'). This distinguishes it from siblings like move_nodes or rotate_nodes.

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 description provides clear context: resize nodes with positive dimensions, non-resizable nodes are skipped. It does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool compared to alternatives, but the operation is self-evident.

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