render_project

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses cost ('Costs a render/credits'), async behavior ('Returns immediately'), effects ('Captions, hook, overlays and motion are applied here'), and where results land ('finished preview lands on the project'). This exceeds minimal expectations, though it omits failure modes or whether previous renders are overwritten.

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?

Two efficient sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every clause adds useful information (workflow position, effects, cost, async behavior, next steps) with zero filler.

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 tool has a single optional param and no output schema, so the description adequately covers purpose, workflow sequence, cost, async behavior, and the result location. This is sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly without additional documentation.

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 coverage is 100% for the single job_id parameter, which already includes the semantics ('Omit to use VIRALSPIN_HOSTED_JOB_ID'). The description adds nothing specific beyond referring to the 'current hosted Swap & Refine timeline', which is redundant with the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 explicitly states the tool's action: 'Bake the current hosted Swap & Refine timeline into a final MP4' — a specific verb, resource, and output format. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by calling it 'the ONE cloud render after a batch of instant timeline edits' and clarifies it is not a publish step.

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 sequencing: 'after a batch of instant timeline edits (swap_clip / trim_clip / reorder_scenes)' and 'then publish with publish_now or schedule_post'. This tells the agent when to use it and what comes next. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives beyond the publish tools.

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