Remove background from video

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

Annotations are minimal, but the description adds critical behavioral details: credit cost per second, processing time estimates, output format (R2-hosted URL), and the frame-by-frame nature. This fully compensates for the lack of detailed annotations.

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?

Four well-structured sentences with no waste. First sentence sets the core action, second explains modes, third gives performance/cost, fourth covers best use and output. Front-loaded with key information.

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 no output schema, the description specifies the output is a processed video URL. Input schema is clear. All necessary context is provided: what, how, cost, performance, limitations, and output. No gaps.

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 already covers parameters with descriptions, but the description adds practical meaning: explains the effect of bgType choices (alpha WebM vs solid color), gives an example hex for customColor, and states the default. Enhances usability beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states the action (strips background) and specific resource (video) using a named service (rembg u2netp). Differentiates from sibling 'aetherwave_remove_background' by specifying video and frame-by-frame processing.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on best use cases (clear edges, people, products) and performance expectations (slow, per-frame processing). Could be more explicit about when not to use, but the slowness warning implicitly discourages use for quick results.

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