assets-get-spritesheet-image

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states it gets an image, without detailing return format (e.g., URL, base64), size limits, or prerequisites. The hint about tile positions is vague.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The first states the purpose, the second adds context. Minimal but effective structure.

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 lacks critical context: no output schema, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., spritesheet must exist), and no guidance on how the key relates to other tools (e.g., assets-get-available-spritesheets if it existed). Incomplete for reliable agent use.

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 coverage is 100%, but the parameter description erroneously calls the key a 'bitmap font' key, contradicting the spritesheet context. This misleads the agent and adds negative 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 it retrieves the PNG image/texture of a spritesheet, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like assets-get-bitmapfont-image. However, the parameter description incorrectly references 'bitmap font' instead of spritesheet, causing slight confusion.

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 implies usage for understanding tile/frame positions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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