Enhance Prompt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It acknowledges it calls an LLM endpoint but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like potential latency, cost, or that it sent the prompt to a remote LLM service. It also doesn't mention that it modifies/expands the input prompt.

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 one sentence long and front-loads the verb-resource-object structure. It's efficient, but under-specifying important behavior means the conciseness doesn't earn full credit.

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?

With 26 parameters, 5 documented in schema, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens to the enhanced prompt, how to pass an image, or what 'process_words' might do. The high parameter complexity demands extensive description; this provides nearly none.

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 only 19% (5 of 26 parameters documented). The description adds no parameter semantics beyond repeating the 'type' values already in the schema. The many undocumented parameters (e.g., temperature, top_k, max_tokens) are unguessable from the name alone, and the description fails to explain them.

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 states it enhances/expands a prompt using an LLM, naming the specific endpoint. It distinguishes the resource from siblings like sdnext_autocomplete or sdnext_prompt_banned but doesn't explicitly contrast with them.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lists types (text/image/video) but provides no context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites like needing an LLM model configured.

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