pixoo_push_image

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

Description reveals non-destructive behavior (push is optional), idempotency (same image push yields same result), and open-world nature (loads from local or URL). It also details the return value showing the exact downsampled result, adding beyond annotations.

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?

Three sentences succinctly cover purpose, return behavior, and kernel guidance. Front-loaded with essential information, no redundant content.

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?

Description explains return value and kernel options, but does not mention prerequisites like device discovery or error conditions. Given tool simplicity and existence of sibling tools for discovery, this is a minor gap.

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 already provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond reiterating source format and kernel choices; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 loads, resizes, and optionally pushes an image to the LED grid, returning a preview. It distinguishes itself from siblings like pixoo_compose_scene by focusing on direct image push.

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 kernel recommendations for pixel art vs photos but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like pixoo_compose_scene or pixoo_display_text. Usage context is implied but not directly addressed.

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