ase_create_sliceCreates a named rectangular region for export to game engines by specifying position and size in an Aseprite sprite.
Create a named slice (rectangular region exported for game engines).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| x | Yes | ||
| y | Yes | ||
| name | Yes | ||
| width | Yes | ||
| height | Yes | ||
| sprite_path | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not mention side effects (e.g., adding to the current sprite), coordinate system, units, or any output/return behavior. An agent cannot anticipate what happens on success or failure, nor whether existing slices are affected.
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, front-loaded sentence with no waste. It communicates the core purpose efficiently, achieving conciseness without sacrificing clarity.
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?
Despite having an output schema (not shown) and six required parameters, the description is far too sparse. It does not clarify the coordinate system, the meaning of 'name', or how the slice integrates with the sprite. With zero annotation and schema coverage, this leaves critical gaps for an agent attempting to invoke the tool correctly.
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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate, but it does not mention any parameter names or semantics. The six required parameters (sprite_path, name, x, y, width, height) are completely unexplained, leaving an agent without clues about coordinate origin, units, or naming constraints.
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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and a specific resource ('named slice'), and clarifies the purpose for game engines. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like ase_list_slices (listing) and ase_delete_slice (deletion), making the tool's purpose 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?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings like ase_export_sprite and ase_set_slice_center exist, but the description does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.