Resize webcam overlay (measured)

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

The description discloses that it reports geometry before and after, which is a useful behavioral trait. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It does not mention potential failure modes (e.g., no active overlay), reversibility of the action, or whether the resize is relative or absolute. It gives some transparency but leaves notable gaps.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundancy or irrelevant detail. Every word earns its place.

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 no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: it does not specify the format or units of the reported geometry, nor does it clarify prerequisites (e.g., what happens if no webcam overlay is active). The ambiguity in the action parameter also remains unresolved. Overall, it is minimally sufficient but not thorough.

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 schema has a single 'action' parameter with enum values, but the description provides zero explanation of these values. No distinction is made between relative ('smaller'/'larger') versus absolute ('small'/'medium'/'large') meanings, which is ambiguous. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description needed to compensate but did not.

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 states a specific verb (resize), a specific resource (active screen-recording webcam overlay), and a distinct behavioral outcome (report geometry before/after). This clearly differentiates it from window_resize and other sibling tools.

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 implies usage by naming the resource ('active screen-recording webcam overlay'), which suggests it should only be used during active recording. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or alternatives, relying on the agent to infer context from the name and sibling list.

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