minimax_generate_video_from_audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It reveals the reference-mode behavior and mentions a contract, but omits side effects, permissions, rate limits, or async processing details. The note about exclusive reference mode adds some transparency but not comprehensive.

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, concise, and without fluff. It delivers the essential purpose and a key behavioral nuance efficiently.

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?

Given that an output schema exists, return values need not be explained. The description explains the audio-guided mode and is clear about inputs, but it does not cover edge cases like missing audio or validation rules. Overall, it is suitably complete for the tool's complexity.

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% with each parameter already described. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond reiterating the reference-mode behavior, so it meets the baseline for full schema 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?

The description clearly states the tool generates a video guided by audio and reference images, and explicitly notes the exclusive reference mode for audio-guided generation. This distinguishes it from siblings like generate_video_from_text and generate_video_from_images.

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 purpose implies usage when audio and reference images are available, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives. The reference-mode detail provides context, but a direct 'use this when you have audio' guideline is absent.

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