happyhorse_generate_video_from_references

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic action, lacking information on authentication, rate limits, async behavior, or the effect of references. The one-sentence description is insufficient.

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?

One concise sentence with no fluff, front-loading the core action. However, given the tool's complexity (9 parameters), a slightly longer description could improve clarity without being wasteful.

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?

Despite a rich schema and output schema, the description does not explain high-level aspects like the generation process, output format, or when to expect results. It is incomplete for a complex video generation tool.

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% and each parameter has a clear description (e.g., 'Refer to supplied images as character1...'). The tool description adds minimal extra value over the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'generate' and resource 'video guided by reference images', distinguishing it from siblings like 'happyhorse_generate_video' (no references) and 'happyhorse_generate_video_from_image' (likely single image).

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?

No explicit when or when-not guidance is provided. The description implies use for video generation with multiple references via parameter 'image_urls', but does not mention alternatives or exclusions, such as for single images.

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