remix_image

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

With no annotations available, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states that a task is created and returns results. It does not mention whether the operation is destructive, requires authentication, incurs costs (despite a sibling 'check_pricing'), or has rate limits. The behavioral transparency is insufficient.

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 of 12 words, efficiently conveying the core purpose and return value with no extraneous information. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is far too minimal. It does not explain what 'remix' entails, how parameters interact, or provide examples. The agent would lack sufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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?

Only 20% of parameters have schema descriptions ('wait' and 'model'). The description adds no parameter-specific details, leaving 8 parameters (e.g., style, aspect_ratio, source_image_url) unexplained. For a tool with 10 parameters, this is poor semantic 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 tool creates an Ideogram V3 task for remixing an image and lists the return values (task id, status, output URLs). The verb 'Create' and resource 'Ideogram V3 task' are specific, and 'remix image' distinguishes from siblings like 'edit_image' and 'reframe_image', though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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 (e.g., edit_image, reframe_image, text_to_image). The description does not mention prerequisites, use cases, or scenarios where this tool is or is not appropriate.

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