Check ffmpeg

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

The description discloses that the tool checks availability and returns install guidance, which is sufficient for a non-destructive check. No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden; it is clear but lacks details on what 'install guidance' entails.

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 a single sentence, concise, and front-loaded with the core action. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose and outcome. It is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so the description need not add parameter meaning. Schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). Baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool checks availability of ffmpeg and ffprobe and returns install guidance if missing. It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like cleanup, extract_scenes, and install_ffmpeg.

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?

The description implies usage context (check before using other video tools) but does not explicitly state when to use or provide alternatives. Sibling tool names help, but no direct guidance.

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