build_palette

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'locked common palette' and OKLab k-means, but lacks details on side effects, permission requirements, or idempotency. Adequate but could be more transparent.

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 efficient sentences for purpose and usage, followed by a structured Args list. No redundant information. Front-loaded with the main action, making it quick to parse.

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?

The description covers parameters, output format, and downstream use. However, it lacks information on the return value (if any) since there is no output schema. Still, for a file-saving tool, the omission is minor and the description is largely complete.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description's Args section explains all four parameters with clear purposes: sources (reference paths), out (save path with format), colors (number of colors), swatch (optional PNG output). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 it creates a locked common palette from multiple references using OKLab k-means and saves as .gpl/.hex. It distinguishes from siblings like extract_palette (single reference) and quantize_palette (existing palette) by specifying the multi-reference input and algorithm.

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?

It explicitly guides the user to pass the resulting palette to pixelize/batch_pixelize for unifying assets. However, it does not compare with alternatives like extract_palette or snap_to_palette, nor does it state when not to use this tool.

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