video_write_metadata

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states 'write metadata tags' but does not clarify whether it overwrites or merges existing tags, or if it modifies the input file versus creating a new output. The auto-generation of output_path suggests a new file, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 extremely concise: one line for purpose and three lines for arguments, with no superfluous words. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

The description covers all three parameters with examples, and the output schema exists to explain return values. However, it lacks details on metadata tag limitations or behavior (merge vs replace), and does not mention any prerequisites or side effects.

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 description coverage, the description adds crucial meaning: input_path is absolute, metadata is a dict with an example, and output_path is auto-generated if omitted. This exceeds the bare schema types.

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 writes metadata tags to video/audio files, with a specific verb ('write') and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like video_read_metadata.

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 for writing metadata but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like video_read_metadata or other video editing tools. No exclusion or alternative guidance provided.

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