generate_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool generates an image from text, but does not disclose output format, default watermark behavior, model behavior, or any side effects. Minimal behavioral detail beyond the tool's name.

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, consisting of two short sentences. The second sentence adds useful detail (text input and single image output) rather than repeating the first. No wasted words or filler.

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 tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description provides no guidance on result format, how to configure size or model, or when to prefer sibling tools. It only explains the basic operation, which is insufficient for a tool with this many configurable options.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage with per-parameter explanations, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance beyond indicating that a text prompt is used, which the schema already documents.

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 a specific verb+resource: '生成图片' (generate image) and explicitly says '使用文字描述生成一张图片' (use text description to generate one image). This differentiates the tool from siblings like image_to_image by specifying text input, and from generate_image_set by specifying a single image.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for text-to-image generation from a text prompt, implying it should be used when the user has a textual description and wants a single image. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or advertise when not to use this tool.

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