fs_image_resize

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'ratio lock' and 'padding support' but does not explain how these features behave, what defaults apply, what happens to the image when aspect ratio is not locked, or whether dest_path is overwritten.

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 filler. Every word adds value: 'Resize image' states the action, and 'ratio lock and padding support' identifies the key features.

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, the description is incomplete for a tool with 6 parameters and no parameter descriptions. It fails to clarify core behavioral details like aspect ratio handling, padding behavior, or expected input dimension semantics.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides hints that 'ratio lock' relates to keep_aspect_ratio and 'padding support' to pad_to_target, but it does not explain the meaning of width and height or how they interact with the optional flags.

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 the specific verb 'Resize' with the resource 'image' and names two key features: 'ratio lock' and 'padding support'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like fs_image_crop and fs_image_rotate.

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. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or contrasting use cases with sibling tools like crop or rotate.

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