ideogram_upscale

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility. It mentions 'guided enhancement' and the resemblance/detail controls but does not disclose side effects, output format, or whether the original image is modified. It lacks any mention of rate limits or auth requirements.

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?

A single concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and mentions the two most relevant controls. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is grossly insufficient. It omits crucial details such as how the output is returned, how to use the prompt, what magic_prompt does, and any side effects or prerequisites. An agent would struggle to invoke this correctly without additional context.

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?

The schema covers all parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by highlighting resemblance and detail as key controls, but it does not explain the prompt, seed, num_images, or magic_prompt parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Upscale') and resource ('an image to higher resolution'), and the 'guided enhancement' phrase adds context. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like generate, edit, or remix, which perform different actions.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the other ideogram tools. It does not mention that this is for upscaling only, nor does it exclude other use cases or reference alternatives.

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