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

Goes well beyond the annotations: discloses that it consumes the user's image credits, can take up to a minute, attaches the result to the post, and returns the image. It also explains timeout and in-progress-limit behavior, which annotations do not cover.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and no filler, but the single dense paragraph chains many clauses together, making it slightly harder to scan than it could be.

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?

Complete for a three-parameter mutation tool with no output schema: it covers the return value, side effects, cost, latency, concurrency, and failure handling, so an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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?

Adds real meaning beyond the schema: prompt should normally be omitted to use the post's own scene and should only be supplied for a different picture; the idea-to-parameter mapping for image_prompt/image_avoid is valuable. task_id's meaning as the target post id is only implied via the list_plan_posts reference, not stated outright.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: makes one post's image and attaches it. It scopes the target precisely ('one post waiting for review') and clearly separates itself from neighbors like import_image or set_video_thumbnail.

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 when-to-use (post waiting for review), how to use idea scenes (pass image_prompt as prompt and image_avoid as avoid), concurrency limits (up to 3), and explicit when-not-to-retry guidance with the list_plan_posts fallback.

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