analyze_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important constraints such as max 8MB, supported formats (MP4/MOV/M4V), and local/remote URL support. However, it does not describe the output format, error handling, or any potential side effects, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose, a bulleted list of use cases, and a final constraints line. No redundancy or unnecessary details, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool with only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, clear usage scenarios, and input constraints. It lacks details about the output format, but the intended use cases are simple enough that an agent can infer the expected result. The description is largely complete for selection and invocation.

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 100%, with both parameters clearly described. The description adds an 8MB size limit and confirms format support, but these are minor additions. The schema already explains the purpose of each parameter, so the description's marginal value is limited.

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's function: '使用 AI 视觉模型分析视频内容' (use AI vision model to analyze video content). It lists four specific use cases, distinguishing it from sibling tools like analyze_image by explicitly targeting video.

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 provides explicit usage guidance with '仅在用户需要以下操作时使用' (only use when the user needs) and a bulleted list of scenarios. It doesn't mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the scope is well-defined.

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