Merge video clips

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint true, but description adds value by clarifying input clips are read-only and unchanged, output may overwrite, and validation errors are reported. This goes beyond annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose. No filler; every sentence adds value.

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 output schema present, description covers purpose, parameters, behavior, and errors. Minor omission: no mention of output format or codec prerequisites, but implied by 'rendered output file' and validation errors. Still highly complete.

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%, but description adds significant meaning: clips are 'ordered absolute paths', output_path auto-generates or overwrites, transition lists examples, transitions overrides transition, transition_duration must fit clips. Each parameter gains context.

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 concatenates two or more video clips into one rendered output file. The verb 'concatenate' and resource 'video clips' are specific. Among sibling tools, none do concatenation, so it is well differentiated.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like video_edit or video_compose. Usage is implied through the description, but lacks exclusions.

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