search-and-replace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It describes a mutation (replacement) but does not detail whether the operation is destructive, how the rest of the image is handled, or what the output format is. The mention of 'inpaint mode' in the mask_url schema description is not echoed in the tool description.

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, efficient sentence that conveys the core purpose without filler. However, it could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose, so slightly below perfect.

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 presence of three parameters with full schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks information about expected output, behavior when using mask, or any side effects. It leaves some gaps for an agent to infer.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter (prompt, mask_url, image_url).

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's purpose: 'Replace objects or elements in an image using text descriptions.' It identifies the verb (replace), resource (objects/elements in an image), and method (text descriptions), distinguishing it from sibling tools which generate or upscale images.

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 usage for replacing objects, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like generate_image or upscale_image, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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