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

The description adds useful behavioral information beyond the annotations: credits are deducted from the user's account and the tool returns a link to the finished image. However, it does not disclose whether generation is synchronous or asynchronous, or how long the operation may take.

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?

The description is two short sentences that front-load the core purpose. Every sentence earns its place: what it does, what it returns, and the cost implication.

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 the primary output and cost, but with six parameters, no output schema, and many related sibling tools, it leaves gaps around when to select it over alternatives and what to expect during execution.

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 all six parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only adds the phrase 'from a prompt', which aligns with the required prompt parameter but adds no meaningful semantic detail 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?

Description states a clear verb and resource: it generates an AI image from a prompt and returns a link to the finished image. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from specialized image siblings like fattly_generate_ad or fattly_create_avatar.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when it should be preferred over sibling tools, no exclusions, and no comparison to specialized image-generation tools.

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