generate_kling_video

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it provides none. There is no mention of how the tool handles waiting, audio, content checks, resolution defaults, or any side effects. The text only restates the basic function and modes.

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 extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than concise quality. It contains only one sentence that adds minimal value, offering no structure or front-loaded essential details for a tool with 13 parameters.

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 having an output schema, the description is severely incomplete given the tool's complexity. It does not mention required input patterns, defaults like version/duration/resolution, or any operational context needed to invoke the tool correctly. There is no coverage of the diverse parameter space.

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 0% and the description does not compensate. The 13 parameters are entirely unexplained; even the hint at 'single prompt or multi-shot' does not map to specific parameter semantics (e.g., prompt vs shots). This fails to help an agent construct correct arguments.

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 uses a specific verb ('Generate') and identifies the resource ('Kling Omni video'), and clarifies the two operational modes ('single prompt or multi-shot'). However, it does not distinguish from sibling video-generation tools like generate_seedance_video, so it misses the differentiation criterion for a 5.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as generate_seedance_video or stitch_videos. The phrase 'single prompt or multi-shot' hints at modes but does not establish context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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