Adobe Firefly Expand

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

Mentions 'browser UI', implying automation, but lacks details on whether the browser opens interactively, required permissions, or side effects (e.g., does it modify the original file?). Without annotations, the description carries the burden but only partially discloses 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?

Single sentence of 14 words, no wasted text. Front-loaded with key action. Could be expanded slightly for better structure (e.g., separating usage hints).

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?

No output schema and description does not mention return values or success/failure behavior. For a tool that saves a file, the agent needs to know what the tool returns (e.g., file path, status). Missing usage context for automation workflow.

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?

All 5 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond repeating parameter descriptions. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents semantics.

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?

Clearly states the tool expands/outpaints a local image using Adobe Firefly's browser UI and saves the result. It distinguishes from siblings like firefly_generate (generates from scratch) and firefly_remove_background. Could be more precise by explicitly using 'outpaint' in the verb.

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 versus alternatives like firefly_generate or firefly_variations. Missing context for ideal scenarios or prerequisites (e.g., image format, size constraints).

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