resample

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

With destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the annotation already flags mutation; the description adds the IntegerResample average behavior for integer downsampling and a checkpoint warning. However, it does not disclose what is modified (e.g., whether the original image is replaced) or the effect of supplying both factor and dimensions.

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?

Two short sentences carry the central modes, algorithm, and a safety directive with no filler. The information is front-loaded and every phrase 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 destructive 6-parameter tool with no output schema and low schema coverage, this description is too thin. It omits the meaning of the required id parameter, valid interpolation options, and outcome/return behavior, so an agent would still need to guess important invocation 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 description coverage is only 17%, so the description must compensate. It does clarify the relationship among factor, width, and height and gives an algorithm detail for integer factors, but it leaves id and interpolation completely unexplained and does not specify valid interpolation values or the interplay of width and height.

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 names the operation with a specific verb ('Resize') and defines two concrete modes — by factor or to width×height — plus the algorithm used for integer downsampling. The resource is not explicitly stated as 'image', but the tool name and the imaging-tool sibling context make it unambiguous.

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?

'Checkpoints first' provides a clear prerequisite for using this destructive tool, but the description does not state when to choose resample over alternatives or what conditions select factor vs width/height mode. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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