text_to_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the return values (task id, status, output URLs) but does not disclose that the task is asynchronous, whether it waits, or any other traits like safety checks or rate limits. This is a significant gap given the schema includes wait and polling parameters.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no filler. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool has 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, making complete context essential. The description provides only the basic purpose and return type, omitting important usage context such as required parameters, async behavior, and parameter semantics, so it is far from complete.

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?

With only 15% schema description coverage, the description adds no parameter-level details. It does not explain what 'seed', 'output_format', or other parameters do, and fails to 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 uses the verb 'Create' and specifies the resource 'Seedream task on RunAPI' with the scope 'text to image', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like edit_image. It also states the return value, further clarifying the tool's function.

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?

The description implies the tool is for generating a text-to-image task, giving clear context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state exclusions or recommend alternative tools such as get_task or edit_image for other cases, leaving usage guidance mostly implicit.

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