Ase Crop Sprite

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

Annotations are completely absent, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says only 'crop' without revealing whether the operation is permanent, how it affects frames/layers, or whether it relies on the current selection. No side effects or destructive implications are mentioned.

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 single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the action, containing no extraneous words. However, it is so minimal that it approaches under-specification rather than achieving the balance of a well-structured, complete description.

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?

With 5 required parameters, no annotations, and no schema descriptions, the description is far too sparse to support correct tool invocation. It lacks coordinate system details, effect scope (e.g., all frames vs. active frame), and any mention of return values, even though an output schema exists.

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 0% for 5 required parameters, and the description adds no meaning to x, y, width, height, or sprite_path. It does not specify coordinate origin, units, or how the rectangle relates to the canvas, leaving the agent with no parameter insight beyond raw types.

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 'Crop the sprite to a rectangle,' which is a specific verb (crop), resource (sprite), and geometric constraint (rectangle). This clearly communicates the core action and distinguishes from tools like ase_resize_canvas or ase_scale_sprite, though it does not explicitly name alternatives such as ase_trim_sprite.

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 related siblings like ase_trim_sprite (which typically removes empty borders) or ase_resize_canvas. The description only states the action, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage scenarios.

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