photoshop_select_rectangle

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says a rectangular selection is created and feathering is optional, but omits whether an existing selection is replaced, coordinate origin, units, feather units, and whether an active Photoshop document is required.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, coordinate order, and optional parameter with no wasted words.

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?

Although an output schema exists and return values need not be described, the combination of no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and a mutation-style selection tool means critical invocation details are missing, including coordinate system, selection interaction, and feather units.

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 0%, but the description compensates partially by stating the coordinate order [left, top, right, bottom] and noting that feathering is optional. It still leaves units, coordinate space, inclusive/exclusive bounds, and feather semantics 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 ('Create') and resource ('rectangular pixel selection'), and even gives the coordinate order [left, top, right, bottom]. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling selection tools such as photoshop_select_ellipse or explain when a rectangular selection is preferable.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., active document), and no alternatives. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name and sibling list.

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