upscale_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it discloses pricing is based on input video length, that a job_id is returned for get_video, the link scheme constraint, and the critical failure-mode warning that a timeout/empty response may mean the job is already running and a retry double-charges. This is exactly the behavioral context an agent needs before invoking a paid async job.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then layers model choice, pricing, return value, link constraint, and the retry warning. Every sentence carries actionable content, though the paragraph is dense and could be slightly tighter.

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 paid asynchronous video job with no output schema, the description covers what it does, what it returns (job_id for get_video), how it is priced, the input constraints, and the retry hazard. An agent has everything needed to invoke it responsibly.

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 the schema already documents each parameter including the default model, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the alternative model name and the https-link constraint, but nothing about resolution syntax or the estimate_only semantics beyond what the schema states.

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 set (sharpen, enlarge, denoise) on a specific resource (video), which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like upscale_image and edit_video. It even names the underlying models used, so an agent knows exactly what this call produces.

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?

Gives clear context: default vs alternative model choice, the https link requirement, and the explicit instruction not to auto-retry on timeout because a retry pays twice. It does not explicitly frame when to choose this over upscale_image or edit_video, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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