Edit image

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation) and openWorldHint=true (accepts extra parameters), but the description adds little beyond mentioning input methods. It does not disclose behavior like error handling, rate limits, or side effects.

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 short but contains redundancy (repeating 'Edit image' in the first sentence). It could be more concise but is not overly verbose.

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 19 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is woefully incomplete. It does not explain return values, required parameter combinations, or constraints.

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 only 32%, and the description fails to explain the many undocumented parameters. It only mentions the three input methods, leaving agents unclear on how to use size, quality, background, etc.

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 tool edits images and mentions three input methods (multipart, JSON URLs, images array) for supported GPT Image models. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like create_image or edit_image_file.

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 vs other image-related tools. The description does not specify prerequisites, recommended scenarios, or when to choose alternative tools.

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