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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, and openWorld=false. The description adds the important prerequisite that an image must be uploaded to make_clip's upload_url first, but it omits side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or what starting the clip actually triggers.

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 sentence with the prerequisite front-loaded before the action, using no filler. Every element earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter job-start tool, the description covers the critical upload-then-start sequence. It does not explain what the tool returns or how to check progress afterward, and there is no output schema to compensate, so it is good but not fully complete.

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%, and clip_id is fully documented in the schema as the ID returned by make_clip. The description reinforces that workflow but adds no parameter syntax or meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific action ('start making the clip') and ties it to the make_clip upload workflow. It distinguishes this tool from make_clip by placing it after the upload step, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It clearly states when to call it: after uploading the image to make_clip's upload_url. The sequencing is explicit, but it does not explain when not to use this tool or name specific alternatives beyond the implicit make_clip predecessor.

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