remove_object

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the underlying models (Grounding DINO, Bria Eraser), pricing (15 sats, Bitcoin Lightning, pay-per-request), and the payment workflow. It does not detail output format or error handling, but the key behavioral traits are transparent.

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 well-structured paragraph that front-loads the main purpose, followed by technical details and pricing. It is concise but could be broken into bullet points for better readability. No unnecessary repetition.

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 has 5 parameters (3 required), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the main behavior, technical approach, and payment model. It does not describe the output format, but the overall completeness is adequate for an AI agent 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% with descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds context for 'query' ('just say person, car, or watermark') and explains the confidence thresholds, but this adds limited value beyond the schema. Baseline is 3 due to high coverage.

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 ('remove unwanted objects'), the input method ('by describing what to remove, no mask needed'), and the resource ('from images'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'remove_background' and 'edit_image' by specifying text-based object removal without masks.

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 when to use the tool (to remove objects by text description) and mentions a key prerequisite: 'Requires create_payment with toolName=remove_object.' It does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools, but the context provides adequate guidance for most use cases.

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