brightness_contrast

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without revealing whether the adjustment modifies the drawable in place, is destructive, or has any side effects. There is no mention of reversibility or selection handling, which is expected for a filter tool.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the core action. There is no redundancy or filler, making it easy to parse.

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 simple nature of the tool, the description is still incomplete. It omits essential parameter details and behavioral context, and the presence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of explanation about how the adjustment behaves or what the output represents.

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%, and the description provides no explanation of the parameters brightness, contrast, or layer_id. It does not mention units, ranges, or the meaning of these values, leaving the agent to guess the semantics solely from the schema's bare names.

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 verb 'Apply' and the resource 'basic brightness/contrast adjustment to a drawable'. It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like hue_saturation and desaturate, though it relies on the name for that differentiation rather than explicit wording.

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 such as hue_saturation or desaturate. It neither states usage context, prerequisites, nor exclusions, leaving the agent without direction.

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