GPT Image 2 Official

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

No annotations exist, so description bears full burden. Explains preset/API key behavior and that it generates/edits images, but lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or file overwrite behavior. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Description is about 5 sentences, front-loads main purpose, and is efficiently structured. Could be slightly more concise but imparts necessary context without excess.

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?

Covers core functionality and important preset/API key interactions, and references prerequisite catalog call. However, with 16 parameters, many (e.g., mode, images, mask) lack sufficient explanation. Output schema exists but description could better connect mode to generate/edit behavior.

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 0%, but description adds meaning for image_size and aspect_ratio by mentioning they derive provider size preset. However, other parameters like quality, output_format, images, mask are not explained in description beyond schema enums.

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 generates or edits images via the OpenAI Images compatible gateway. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like gpt_image_2_temporary, which may have similar purpose but different scope.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use preset/API key overrides and when to call list_image_tools_catalog first. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus gpt_image_2_temporary or other image tools.

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