Resize Canvas or Image

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds context that 'image' resamples (alters pixels) and 'canvas' adds/removes space (potentially destructive when removing). It does not discuss undo, reversibility, or permissions, but the annotations cover the destructive nature.

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 two sentences, extremely concise, and front-loads the main function. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality adequately. It explains both modes and the main parameters. Minor omission: no mention of constraints on width/height relative to original size, but that is not critical for basic understanding.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the action parameter's two modes and their effects. For width, height, and resampleMethod, the schema already describes them sufficiently; the description does not add extra detail but is not needed.

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 tool resizes either the canvas or the image, using precise verbs ('adds/removes space' vs 'resamples all content'). It distinguishes between the two actions and differentiates from siblings like ps_transform (which performs transformations) and ps_apply_filter (which applies filters).

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 explicit guidance on when to use each action: 'Use "canvas" to change document bounds without scaling, or "image" to scale everything.' However, it does not compare to alternative tools like ps_transform for scaling, leaving some room for improvement in excluding alternatives.

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