animate_with_text

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions legacy and fixed size but lacks details on side effects, auth needs, rate limits, or return format. Critical gaps remain.

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?

Description is extremely concise: one sentence on purpose plus two sentences of usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place; front-loaded with key constraint.

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 high complexity (17 params, 4 required, nested objects) and no output schema, the description only covers legacy nature and size restriction. Missing workflow, expected input/output, and edge cases.

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 88% (high), so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific info beyond the schema, nor does it compensate for the uncovered 12%.

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 identifies the tool as a legacy animation generator from text and reference image, with a fixed 64x64 size. It distinguishes itself from newer versions (v2, v3) and alternative tools (animate_character).

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?

Explicitly states when to use alternatives: prefer v2 for any size 32-256, v3 for keyframe-based, and animate_character for saved character IDs. Provides clear guidance for selecting the appropriate tool.

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