video_storyboard

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions that output_dir is auto-generated if omitted, but does not describe side effects (e.g., file overwriting, temporary files), permissions needed, or failure modes. The 'human review' hint implies a visual output, but behavioral details are minimal.

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: two sentences plus a clear parameter list. The main purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value without redundancy. No unnecessary 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?

Given the presence of an output schema (though not shown), the description covers the essential purpose and parameter details. It lacks information on input video format requirements or behavior when extraction fails, but for a tool with output schema, it is fairly complete. Minor gaps prevent a perfect score.

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 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: input_path (absolute path), output_dir (save directory, auto-generated if omitted), frame_count (number of key frames). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and default fields.

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 verb 'Extract key frames and create a storyboard grid', specifying the resource (key frames/storyboard) and purpose (human review). This distinguishes it from siblings like video_extract_frame (single frame) and video_export_frames (batch export).

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 explains what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it over alternatives (e.g., video_extract_frame, video_export_frames). The usage context is implied by the purpose, but no when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned.

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