invert_selection

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely names the action without explaining effects like whether it modifies selection state, requires an existing selection, or returns a value.

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, non-redundant sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. It is concise, though it could be expanded with useful context without becoming verbose.

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?

For a tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not connect the operation to image_id, mention preconditions, or indicate what the tool returns, leaving the agent to infer critical 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?

Schema coverage for parameters is 0%, and the description does not mention image_id at all. While the parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to clarify how it relates to the 'current selection' or how to use it.

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 a specific operation ('invert') applied to a resource ('the current selection'). It stands apart from sibling tools like select_all, select_none, and select_rectangle by using a unique verb, though it stops short of defining what 'invert' entails in this context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other selection tools, nor are prerequisites such as an active selection or the relationship to the image_id parameter mentioned.

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