capcut_export_chapters

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers: fps snapping, the second-containing-frame rule, auto-insertion of a 00:00:00 line, three explicit refusal conditions, and the non-overwrite guarantee for out_path. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs and none are recoverable from the schema.

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-loaded with the core action, then the format, then the edge-case rules. Every sentence carries information, though the refusal rules and dry-run note are packed densely and could be ordered slightly more crisply. 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?

No output schema exists, so the description must describe the return value, and it does: a YouTube chapter list in HH:MM:SS Title form, plus the auto-inserted 0:00 line. For a tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is complete enough to call correctly.

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, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that dry_run is the default when out_path is set and that out_path never overwrites, and it explains the purpose of zero_title (YouTube's 0:00 requirement). These enrich the parameters rather than restating them.

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 (read timeline markers, export a YouTube chapter list) and names its input source, capcut_add_markers. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like capcut_export_srt and capcut_export_draft, and it even names the exact output format (HH:MM:SS Title).

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: it reads markers produced by capcut_add_markers, defaults to dry-run when out_path is set, and spells out the exact conditions under which it refuses to produce a list. It does not explicitly compare itself to capcut_export_srt or other export siblings, so routing between export variants still requires inference.

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