text_to_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action and return type. It does not disclose whether the tool blocks, requires authentication, is idempotent, or how the 'wait' parameter affects behavior. Agents must infer from parameter names.

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 a single, well-structured sentence conveying the core purpose and return value without any unnecessary words.

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?

Given the complexity of 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is too brief. It omits the asynchronous workflow, polling behavior, output format details, and parameter constraints, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 only 25%, and the description adds no parameter details. The critical 'prompt' parameter is not explained, nor are 'model', 'aspect_ratio', or 'callback_url'. The single sentence does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 verb 'Create', the resource 'Flux task', the platform 'RunAPI', and the modality 'text to image'. It also mentions the return value (task id, status, output URLs). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_task and remix_image.

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 alternatives like remix_image or get_task. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use, or context for polling versus async.

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