get_video

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

With no annotations, this description carries the full load and does so well: it discloses the two outcome states ('still generating' vs done), that returned download links are private and expire, and that calling again reissues fresh links. It also mentions billing attribution (AI Gateway billed), so the agent knows the cost-inspection aspect is bundled into the call.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with the action and source tool list, followed by the return semantics and expiry caveat. No 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?

For a single-input polling tool with no output schema, the description covers the call trigger, the two possible return shapes, link expiry behavior, and re-issuance behavior. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds value by indicating job_id must come from one of the specified video tools, which reinforces the dependency beyond the schema's generic 'returned by a video tool' phrasing.

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?

States a specific verb (Check) and resource (a video job) and explicitly names all five sibling tools that produce the job (start_video, motion_control, upscale_video, edit_video, extend_video), so an agent can route unambiguously.

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 identifies the source of the job_id via the named sibling tools and explains the re-call behavior for expired links. It does not explicitly state when NOT to use it (e.g., use start_video for launching new jobs), but the input dependency makes the trigger condition clear.

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