pack_atlas

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any side effects, whether output files are overwritten, prerequisites, or the nature of the operation beyond 'pack.' This lack of detail is insufficient for an agent to anticipate consequences.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and output. It contains no redundant or unnecessary information.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a minimal but adequate overview for a simple tool. It states the output files (.atlas and .png) but omits behavioral details like overwriting or directory creation, making it only partially complete for an agent to safely invoke.

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% and the description does not explain any of the three parameters (images_dir, out_dir, name). While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no explicit meaning beyond the schema titles, leaving the agent to infer semantics from context.

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 function: 'Pack a folder of PNGs into <name>.atlas + <name>.png with the Spine packer.' It uses a specific verb (pack) and resource (folder of PNGs → atlas + png), distinguishing it from sibling tools like export_project or batch.

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?

Usage context is implied by the action ('Pack a folder of PNGs') but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusion criteria. The description does not mention when it is appropriate or inappropriate to use.

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