analyze_for_intellisearch

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

No annotations present, so description carries burden. It discloses operational scopes and required packages, but does not specify if the operation is idempotent, destructive, or its side effects on existing analysis. Minimal behavioral context beyond input scope.

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 short paragraphs: a concise action statement followed by a bullet-like Args section. Efficient and well-structured, though could be slightly tighter by removing redundancy (e.g., 'Requires the...' is clear).

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?

With an output schema (not visible but stated present) and 4 parameters all described, the description covers prerequisites, scope, and options. Sibling reset_intellisearch_analysis provides complementary context. Missing notes on return data or time cost, but sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description fully compensates by defining each parameter (clip_name, folder_path, identify_faces, better_mode) including defaults and behavior when omitted (e.g., 'current folder' if neither given). This is rich and adds meaning beyond the 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?

Description clearly states the tool runs Intellisearch analysis, and specifies three distinct scopes: single clip, folder, or current Media Pool folder. It differentiates from sibling analyze_for_slate by focusing on a different analysis type.

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 prerequisites (required AI packages) and explains the mode selection via better_mode. Lacks direct comparison with siblings like reset_intellisearch_analysis to say when to analyze vs reset, but still gives adequate context.

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