spawn_asset_preview

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains safety: it queries the storage host directly without triggering generation and clarifies that a 404 means not created rather than forbidden. This prevents common misconceptions.

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?

Three focused sentences: purpose, usage scenarios, and safety. No fluff, front-loaded with the primary action.

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 purpose, usage, and safety for a simple 3-parameter tool. With no output schema, it could clarify return format for non-image assets, but the schema and description together are sufficient.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter meaning beyond the schema, mainly reinforcing inline rendering which is already documented in the render parameter.

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 checks asset existence and returns images inline for visual inspection. The verb 'check' and 'look at' specify the resource and distinguish it from sibling tools like search, sync, and scan.

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?

Explicit usage contexts are given: use on unfamiliar paths before building, and after generating a new asset. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives beyond implied context.

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