get_resource_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output format and downscaling constraint, but does not mention potential errors (e.g., unsupported formats), whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that includes all critical information without unnecessary words. It describes action, target, output, and constraint efficiently.

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?

For a simple tool, the description covers the essential output (base64 PNG) and constraint (max_size). Given no annotations or output schema, it could mention error handling or return format details, but is sufficiently complete for basic 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 0%, so the description compensates well by explaining max_size ('downscaled so its longest side is at most max_size pixels') and implying the path is the resource identifier. However, it could be more explicit about the path's accepted formats.

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 has a specific verb ('Render'), a clear resource ('an image or texture resource'), and a well-defined output ('base64 PNG'). It also includes the downscale behavior, making it distinct from sibling tools like read_resource.

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 (generating a preview image) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like read_resource or edit_resource, nor does it mention any exclusions or preconditions.

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