generate_with_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function, providing no details about template mechanics, file output, resolution constraints, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a generation tool with 7 parameters.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified, which slightly reduces the score, but it does not contain waste.

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 tool's complexity—7 parameters, nested config, enums, no output schema, and no annotations—the description is far too minimal. It omits guidance on how templates work, how customization operates, and which model/resolution options are relevant, leaving the agent to infer crucial context from the schema alone.

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 the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; the mention of 'template' is redundant with the schema's template parameter definition.

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 the action ('Generate an image') and the specific method ('using a pre-defined style template'). This distinguishes it from edit_image or analyze_image, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling generate_image, which may serve as the generic generation tool.

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 phrase 'pre-defined style template' implies this tool is for template-based generation, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives like generate_image or generate_variations. The use case is implied rather than stated.

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