Generate an image

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

Annotations already declare that this is a non-readonly, non-destructive, open-world, non-idempotent operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful operational context: it returns the image and incurs a small cost from the account balance, which is exactly the kind of behavioral detail annotations do not convey.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by return/cost behavior and the alternative listing mode. Every sentence earns its place with no repetition or filler.

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 seven parameters, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description supplies the important missing pieces: what is returned and that generation costs money. It could specify the image return format or link cost more explicitly, but overall an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so every parameter is already well documented in the input schema. The description mentions prompt, `list: true`, and model families, but adds little parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 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 states a specific verb and resource: generate an image from a text prompt using named Stable Diffusion models. It also distinguishes the tool's listing mode and names the underlying provider, so an agent can immediately understand that this is image generation rather than chat or balance lookup.

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?

It clearly explains when to use the tool for generation and when to pass `list: true` to inspect available image models and prices instead. It does not explicitly discuss when to prefer a sibling tool such as `list_models`, but the image-generation context is clear enough that this is a minor gap.

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