Prepare Modellix Image Task

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond these: it resolves assets, selects an approved model, discloses cost, and returns a short-lived fingerprint. It also explicitly states it does not upload or submit, which clarifies the side-effect profile. No contradictions; the extra disclosure enhances transparency.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and includes a crucial negative constraint ('Does not upload or submit'). Every sentence adds value with zero redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the tool is highly complex with 15 parameters and 5 enums. The description only covers high-level purpose and does not explain prerequisites, how to set parameters, or how this step chains with sibling tools (beyond not submitting). An agent would struggle to invoke this correctly without additional documentation.

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?

With zero schema description coverage, the description carries full responsibility for parameter guidance, but it only gives vague hints like 'ordered project assets' and 'approved model' without mapping to specific parameters. It does not explain required fields (prompt, mode) or optional ones (size, count, fitPolicy, etc.), leaving agents without enough detail to correctly populate the 15-parameter 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?

The description clearly states what the tool does: it resolves assets, selects an approved model, discloses output/cost, and returns a short-lived fingerprint. The explicit 'Does not upload or submit' distinguishes it from sibling submission tools, making its role as a preparation step unambiguous.

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 implies usage as a pre-submission step by stating it does not upload or submit, which signals that a separate submission tool is needed. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like 'submit_modellix_image_task', relying on sibling names for context. Clear when-to-use context is present, but no explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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