seedream_multi_image_fusion

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

The description indicates the tool generates new images, consistent with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). However, it does not elaborate on side effects, memory usage, or behavior under specific conditions like failed inputs.

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 with an example, conveying essential information without waste. It could be slightly more structured but is well-suited for quick comprehension.

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 explains the core functionality but omits output details (e.g., format) and prerequisites. The rich schema compensates partially, but without an output schema, more contextual guidance would be beneficial.

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?

The tool description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema, but the nested schema provides comprehensive descriptions for each field. The description's lack of parameter info is acceptable as the schema already covers semantics.

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 'multi-image fusion' and provides specific examples like merging clothing with models or people with landscapes, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinguishing it from siblings like text-to-image or image-to-image.

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 gives examples of when to use (e.g., outfit creation, portrait with scenery) but does not explicitly state when not to use or offer direct comparisons to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage scenarios.

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