markly_watermark_text

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the input requirements (image URL, text) and output behavior (returns a download URL valid for 30 minutes). It does not, however, discuss whether the original image is modified or mention any authorization or rate limits.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the purpose and required inputs, then state the output and its validity period. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary words.

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?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essentials but lacks guidance on common parameter combinations or tips for effective usage. It is not misleading but feels slightly sparse given the tool's complexity.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only mentioning the two required parameters. It does not explain default values or other parameter details that could aid understanding.

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 ('Add a text watermark to an image') and identifies the resource ('image'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'markly_watermark_logo' (logo watermark) and 'markly_batch_watermark' (batch processing).

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 when to use (when adding a text watermark) but does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives. There is no mention of when to use sibling tools instead.

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