edit_image

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

没有提供 annotations，描述承担了全部安全/行为披露责任。但描述仅说明'生成新图片'这一动作，未提及权限要求、速率限制、输出格式或潜在副作用，行为透明性不足。

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?

描述以一句话概述用途，随后用列表方式呈现参数，结构清晰，没有冗余内容。虽然参数列表与 schema 重复，但作为面向代理的自然语言说明是可接受的。

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?

工具本身较简单，schema 完整覆盖参数，但缺少与兄弟工具的使用边界和返回值说明。在无 annotations 和 output schema 的情况下，描述仅达到最低可用标准，未提供更丰富的上下文。

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 描述覆盖率达 100%，描述中的参数说明与 schema 属性描述基本重复，未增加额外语义。'必填'标注在 schema 中已有体现，因此描述未提供超越 schema 的价值，维持基线 3 分。

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?

描述以'基于参考图片生成新图片（图生图）'开头，明确说明了工具的核心功能：基于参考图片生成新图片。动词'生成'和资源'图片'清晰，并且'基于参考图片'与兄弟工具 generate_image（文生图）形成明显区分。

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?

描述明确指出了图生图的使用场景，让 agent 能根据是否有参考图片来决定选择此工具而非 generate_image。但未显式给出'何时不使用'或指名替代工具，因此未达到最高分。

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