text_to_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the call creates an asynchronous task and returns 'a task id, status, and output URLs', which is useful since no output schema exists, but it says nothing about cost/credit consumption, rate limits, or the wait/polling side effect that the schema exposes.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the return contract appended. Every clause earns its place.

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 an 8-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action and the return shape but omits polling/wait semantics, model selection, and failure/timeout behaviour. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 75%, below the high-coverage baseline, and the description mentions no parameters at all. It never explains the wait/poll behaviour, model slug selection, timeout_ms, or callback_url, leaving the undocumented quarter of parameters without compensation.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Create a Midjourney task on RunAPI') plus the modality '(text to image)', which implicitly separates it from edit_image, image_to_video, and image_to_prompt. It never names a sibling or an explicit routing condition, so it falls short of the top mark.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus edit_image, image_to_video, or image_to_prompt, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage purely from the parenthetical modality hint.

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