midjourney_get_prompt_guide

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it returns a guide with prompt structure, parameters, and examples. It is a read-only operation with no side effects, and the return content is clearly stated.

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 three concise sentences: purpose, benefit, and return content. It is well-structured with no unnecessary fluff, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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?

Given no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose and return content completely. It leaves no gaps in understanding what the tool does and what it provides.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but since none exist, the baseline score of 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

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 'Get guidance on writing effective prompts for Midjourney,' which identifies the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'midjourney_imagine' by focusing on guidance rather than generation.

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 explains what the guide does and implies usage before writing prompts, saying 'Following this guide helps Midjourney understand your creative vision.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives, though this is minimally necessary for a guide tool.

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