Generate brand mockups

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It transparently covers credit consumption per variation/scene combination, refunds on failed enqueues, the async queue behavior, the response containing job id and polling URL, and the permission requirement. This exceeds typical disclosure levels.

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 tightly written sentences front-load the core action, then efficiently cover cost, failure handling, response contents, and required permission. Every sentence adds value with zero wasted words.

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 essential aspects for a queueing tool: what it does, cost, failure refund, response content, and permission. It doesn't elaborate on polling mechanics, but the sibling get_mockup_job and the polling URL hint provide sufficient context. Given no output schema or annotations, this is reasonably complete.

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 schema already provides 100% parameter description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the cost model tied to the variation/scene combinations and the async queue semantics, which enriches understanding of how the parameters relate to behavior.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Queue photographic mockups for selected variations and template scenes.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like list_mockup_jobs and get_mockup_job, which list or retrieve mockup jobs.

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 provides clear context for use: it queues mockups, explains the credit cost model, and notes the kits:write permission requirement. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the context is strong enough to imply the primary use case.

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