text_to_image

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions API call to Minimax and cost, but lacks details on side effects, authorization, rate limits, or error handling. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, cost warning, and parameter details. It is somewhat verbose but remains efficient, with front-loaded key information.

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 the complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers all parameters, explains return value, and provides cost context. Missing error handling and edge cases, but reasonably complete for the task.

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 description lists all 6 parameters with explanations, including defaults and allowed values (e.g., aspect_ratio options). Since schema description coverage is 0%, this provides essential meaning beyond the schema, though some details like prompt_optimizer effect are minimal.

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 'Generate a image from a prompt', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like generate_video and text_to_audio, leaving no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 includes a cost warning advising to only use when explicitly requested, providing clear context for usage. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, missing full exclusion guidance.

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