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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds practical behavioral context: the URL is short-lived, requires generation completion, and is ownership-scoped. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause contributes meaning: source context, action, freshness, scope, and ownership constraint.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with an output schema and strong annotations, the description covers the key constraints: where to call it, what it returns, and what prerequisites apply. The only minor gap is not explicitly naming jobId as the generation ID, but this is easily inferable.

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 input schema provides only a bare jobId string with no descriptionholistically, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description implies jobId refers to a generation ('one completed owned generation') but never explicitly explains that jobId is the generation identifier, leaving some inference to the agent.

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 a specific action: create a fresh short-lived attachment URL for a completed owned generation. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_generation_status, prepare_generation, and present_generation by naming the exact resource and outcome.

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 clear context: use it from the MaxVideoAI result app and only for completed owned generations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the context is sufficiently directive.

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