swap_palette_indices

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

The description explicitly states that 'The image looks unchanged,' which is a key behavioral fact. However, it does not disclose reversibility, error handling, or permission requirements. With no annotations, this provides valuable but incomplete transparency.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every word is necessary. No redundancy or extraneous 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?

The description covers the primary effect and visual invariance. It lacks details on edge cases, undo behavior, or index bounds, but for a simple swap operation, it is fairly complete. No output schema reduces the need for return value documentation.

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 67%, so the schema documents doc_id and a's meaning as 'Palette index'. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate for moderate coverage with no added value.

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 action (swap two palette entries and all pixel references) and the resource (palette indices). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like set_palette_color and remove_palette_color by specifying that it swaps indices globally.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_palette_color or remove_palette_color. It does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions.

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