recraft_creative_upscale

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose that the upscale is creative, includes AI-generated detail, and refines faces, which is useful beyond the tool name. However, it does not describe output behavior, potential image modifications, or any side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by a precise use-case qualifier. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and appropriate context.

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 description is adequate for a simple two-parameter tool: it states what the tool does and when it is best used. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return format or how the output is delivered, so an agent is not fully informed about the call's result.

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%, so the parameters are already well documented in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific action ('Upscale an image') and a resource, then clarifies its creative nature with 'AI-generated detail enhancement and face refinement.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling recraft_crisp_upscale, which implies a more straightforward, non-creative upscale.

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 phrase 'Best for photos and realistic images' gives a clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the use-case guidance is specific enough to route an agent appropriately.

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