crop_canvas

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

The description mentions that content outside the rectangle is 'discarded,' indicating destructive behavior. However, with no annotations provided, it lacks details on file modification, reversibility, or required permissions.

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 extremely concise: one sentence for the action, followed by a clear argument list. No unnecessary words; front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 5 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what each parameter means. Slightly missing return value info, but as a mutation tool, it's sufficient.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: filename (file to modify), x (left edge), y (top edge), width, height. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema titles.

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's action: 'Crop the canvas to the given rectangle, discarding content outside it.' This is specific and distinct from siblings like `resize_canvas` which scales content, or other canvas operations.

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 implies usage for cropping but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like `resize_canvas` or `create_canvas`. No conditions or exclusions are stated.

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