edit_image

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic action ('edit, extend, or compose') without detailing side effects, permission requirements, or impact on original images. Key behavioral aspects (e.g., moderation, output modes) are omitted.

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, which is concise but lacks structure. While brevity is positive, it omits critical information that would justify its length. It could be more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 (14 parameters, no output schema), the description is insufficiently complete. It covers only prompt and mask, leaving many configuration options (quality, background, output format, etc.) unexplained.

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 0% and the description adds no parameter explanation beyond 'prompt' and 'optional mask'. With 14 parameters including enums and nested objects, the agent receives no help understanding their meaning or usage.

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 uses specific verbs 'edit, extend, or compose images' and mentions the key inputs (prompt, optional mask). It clearly indicates the tool's main function, though it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tool 'edit_image_conversation'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., generate_image). Does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or appropriate contexts.

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