Inspect a Precise Video Window

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

The description goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing that it creates temporary clips, performs remote uploads, and cleans up afterward. It also specifies the analysis is audio-free and visual-only, adding valuable behavioral context without contradicting the readOnlyHint.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and includes a clean note about cleanup. Every word earns its place, with no redundant information. This is concise and well-structured.

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 covers the process (extract, analyze, cleanup) and the annotations cover safety, but with no output schema, it does not explicitly describe the return value format. It implies an answer is provided but does not state whether it is text, a report, or something else. This is a minor gap, given the tool's purpose is fairly self-explanatory.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema already provides, but it does reinforce the time-window context (start_seconds/end_seconds) implicitly. No additional param semantics are introduced.

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's specific function: extracting an audio-free temporary clip for a requested time window and sending it for visual-only analysis. It uses precise verbs ('extracts', 'sends') and names the resource (source-video time window), distinguishing it from whole-video analysis tools like analyze_video.

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 establishes a clear context: this tool is for analyzing a precise time window of a video. It implies when to use it (when you have specific start/end times) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The phrase 'requested source-video time window' provides clear scope, though it does not name sibling tools as alternatives.

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