record_video

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

Annotations already declare the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false), yet the description adds real value: capture scope ('only the game canvas, not the desktop or credentials'), the output path, the returned payload shape, and required runtime preconditions.

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 dense sentences with no filler; purpose and the start/stop semantics are front-loaded, and the return payload and defaults follow the core intent.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by naming the returned fields and save location, and it lists the runtime prerequisites for a non-read-only operation. Minor gaps remain, such as behavior when a capture is already active or how timeoutMs interacts with the defaults.

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 schema already documents all five parameters with ranges and defaults. The description restates name/fps/bitrate defaults but says nothing extra about timeoutMs, so it sits at 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Start or stop recording the live RPG Maker MV playtest canvas') and scopes it precisely via the action enum. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like take_screenshot or run_playtest.

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?

Explains the two modes and lists prerequisites (bridge plugin, running bridge, connected playtest). It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling take_screenshot, so the alternative-selection guidance stops short of a 5.

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