edit_image

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It indicates an async task pattern (returns task id) but does not disclose whether edits are destructive, authentication needs, or error behavior. Essential behavioral traits are missing.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with the action. However, it uses internal jargon ('Grok Imagine task on RunAPI') which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

The description is critically incomplete: it claims to edit an image, yet the input schema has no parameter for the image source (URL or file). The agent cannot infer how to specify the image to edit. No output schema exists, and annotations are absent, leaving major gaps for correct invocation.

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 50%, yet the description adds no parameter-specific information. It only restates high-level purpose (edit image) and return values, failing to clarify the role of 'wait', 'timeout_ms', 'poll_interval_ms', or the model enum.

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 it creates a task for editing an image, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like text_to_image or upscale_image, relying on the name for distinction.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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