continue_editing

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool automatically uses the previous image, which is key. However, it does not describe what happens if no previous image exists, whether the tool modifies session state, or what the output is. For a mutation tool, more behavioral detail is needed.

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 sentences: the first defines what the tool does, the second explains its use case. It is clear, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words or fluff.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain return values or behavior, but it does not. It also omits error conditions (e.g., no previous image in session). Given the complexity of image editing with optional references, the description is incomplete.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds context by explaining the purpose of reference images (style transfer, adding elements) and the automatic use of the previous image, which enhances understanding beyond the schema's descriptions.

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 continues editing the last image from the session, with optional reference images. It specifies the verb 'continue editing', the resource 'last image', and distinguishes from siblings like edit_image (which likely requires a file path) and generate_image (creates new).

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 explicitly says to use for iterative improvements on the most recent image and notes that it automatically uses the previous image without needing a file path. This guides the agent on when to use this tool instead of edit_image or generate_image. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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