design_apply_duotone

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says a layer is added, but does not disclose whether the effect is non-destructive, which layer or selection it targets, whether it requires an open sketch, or how it can be removed afterwards.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler and the key action front-loaded. It is efficient, though its brevity comes at the cost of any scoping detail.

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 mutating filter-application tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate: it names the effect and the schema covers all parameters. It omits target context and post-application behavior, which an agent would likely need.

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 100%, with all three optional parameters documented including defaults and hex/numeric formats, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no additional meaning about darkColor, lightColor, or intensity, which is the baseline expectation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: adding a duotone color-mapping filter layer. This distinguishes it from non-filter siblings, but among the crowded design_apply_* filter family (grain, halftone, posterize, gradient_map) it does not explicitly contrast the duotone effect with its nearest alternative, gradient_map.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as design_apply_gradient_map or design_set_blend, despite a large set of adjacent filter tools. Usage is only implied by the verb 'add'.

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