compose_images

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 disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions the image limit (up to 14) but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, destructive, modifies originals, or has any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 with only two sentences, no redundant information, and front-loaded with the core action. Every word serves a purpose.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and a limit, but omits details about return values, error conditions, or any behavioral side effects. For a tool with 4 parameters, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100%, and the parameter descriptions in the schema are self-explanatory. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, such as the 14-image limit, but does not explain parameter interactions or provide additional context for the 'prompt' or 'aspectRatio' fields.

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 ('combine multiple images'), the resource ('images into a new composition'), and provides specific use cases (product mockups, character consistency, creative collages). It also notes the limit of 14 images, distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_image or generate_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 implies usage for composition tasks via examples ('Perfect for product mockups...'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites. There is no guidance on when not to use it.

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