photoshop_expand_selection

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says selection expands but doesn't state what happens if no selection is active (error?), whether it requires an open document, whether the operation is undoable, or how it interacts with feathering. Minimal behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, zero waste.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be explained. However, with no annotations and no error/precondition info, the description is minimally complete for a mutate-selection tool that requires an active selection.

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%, but the single parameter 'pixels' is semantically simple. The description says 'outwards by specified pixels' which adds the direction and unit meaning beyond the bare schema. Baseline 4 for zero params doesn't apply since there is one param; with 0% coverage a 3 reflects adequate but not rich specification (no range, no negative-value behavior).

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?

Names a specific verb (expand), resource (active selection), and direction/unit (outwards by specified pixels). Clearly distinguished from sibling photoshop_contract_selection which does the opposite.

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?

Implies usage by describing what it does, but gives no explicit when-to-use context or reference to the sibling contract/feather tools which are the natural alternatives.

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