paste_stamp

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully bears the burden of disclosure. It transparently states that transparent pixels are skipped by default and that symmetry is ignored, explaining the rationale. It does not cover error handling or stamp existence validation, but the key behavioral defaults are well covered.

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, using only three sentences to convey purpose, default transparency behavior, and key symmetry distinction. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 the tool has 13 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on failure modes, required parameters (x, y, name), and the effects of optional parameters like clip, frame, and render. It focuses on the most important behavioral traits but misses some contextual details.

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?

The description adds value beyond the input schema by explaining the default behaviors for skip_transparent and ignore_symmetry, and emphasizes that flips and rotation are optional. With only 54% schema description coverage, it compensates by highlighting the most critical parameter behaviors.

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 pastes a named stamp with optional flips and rotation, directly indicating its primary function. It also distinguishes from siblings by noting the default symmetry behavior, making its specific use case clear.

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 a hint about when to use this tool versus others by mentioning that it ignores document symmetry by default, contrasting with other tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide exhaustive when-not-to-use guidance.

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