generate_image

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses editing capability, combination of references, and return format (Markdown with URLs and revised prompt). Could mention if any side effects or auth requirements, but transparent enough.

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 well-structured with Args and Returns sections, and each sentence adds value. No fluff, easy to parse.

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?

Despite 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers all param uses, the edit vs generate distinction, and the return format. Complete for an image generation tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds full meaning to each parameter, including purpose, defaults, and examples (e.g., '16:9'). Slightly imprecise for enums (e.g., resolution only says '1k' or '2k'), but sufficient.

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 generates or edits images using Grok Imagine, with specific explanation of how references work. No sibling tools do this, so it is well-differentiated.

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?

It explains when to use image_paths/image_urls for editing and that multiple references are combined. It implicitly covers when to generate vs edit. Could be more explicit about not using for other tasks, but adequate.

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