Generate Image (MiniMax)

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

The description discloses key behavioral traits: images are saved to disk (mutation), file paths are returned, and seed-based reproducibility is possible. This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) by explaining the side effect and return format. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 paragraph of three sentences, front-loading the core purpose. Every sentence adds value: core action, supported features, and side effect/return. No superfluous information.

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 (8 parameters, 1 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential context: it states the side effect (disk saving) and return value (file paths). The agent has enough information to invoke the tool 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions features like batch generation and aspect ratios, but these correspond directly to parameters (n, aspect_ratio) already documented in the schema. It adds no new semantic meaning beyond summarizing capabilities.

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 'Generate images from text prompts using MiniMax's image-01 model', providing a specific verb and resource. It lists key capabilities such as aspect ratios, batch generation, and image-to-image, which distinguish it within the context of image generation tools.

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?

While no sibling tools are listed for comparison, the description implicitly defines when to use this tool: for image generation with specific features like batch, aspect ratios, and character references. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent.

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