pixel_shift_canvas

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds detail: pixels lost at edges, vacated space transparent, wrap re-entry behavior, and return JSON structure. This goes beyond annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action, then covering wrap and return. No wasted words; every sentence adds value.

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?

Covers main behavior, wrap option, preview, and return JSON. With no output schema, it explains return structure. Missing explicit mention of parameter limits but schema covers that.

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 descriptions cover each parameter, but the tool description adds context for 'wrap' (re-entry from opposite edge) and clarifies what happens without wrap. It also mentions preview and return value.

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 clearly states the tool shifts the canvas by (dx, dy) pixels and provides specific animation use cases (bobbing, jumping, sliding). It contrasts with sibling tools like pixel_transform_canvas by focusing on quick translation.

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 gives concrete example uses (animation frames, scrolling backgrounds) and explains the wrap behavior. It does not explicitly say when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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