Generate an image with Antigravity

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint false, openWorldHint true), the description adds valuable behavioral context: it consumes AI Pro quota, saves the image, returns path/format/size, and notes that the extension may be corrected. It also mentions unsandboxed session and same privileges as other tools.

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 concise, with two paragraphs that front-load the main purpose. Every sentence adds essential information (quota, file output, format behavior, security note). No 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?

The description covers key aspects: output details (path, format, byte size), format selection, execution context (unsandboxed, same privileges), and quota usage. It references a security note from elsewhere. An output schema exists but is not shown; still, the description sufficiently explains return values.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description adds minimal extra detail for parameters. It restates that output_path can be absolute/relative and timeout_s default is 240, but these are already in the schema. The format correction note is a minor addition.

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 that the tool generates an image using Antigravity (Gemini image model via agy CLI). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like antigravity_ask (text generation) and antigravity_image_swarm by focusing on single image generation with file saving.

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 explains the tool's behavior (quota usage, file path return) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like antigravity_image_swarm. It lacks guidance on appropriate prompts or scenarios.

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