video_multi

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

The description discloses the core behavior (generating smooth transitions between keyframes) but does not mention other behavioral aspects such as asynchronous processing, duration limits, or that the last frame's prompt is ignored (these are only in the schema). With no annotations, the description carries the burden but provides minimal context.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no filler, making it highly efficient.

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 tool's complexity (6 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is quite minimal. While the schema is extensive, the description lacks information about the expected output, how to retrieve results, or how this tool fits with siblings like video_frame. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 schema provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions with detailed explanations, examples, and constraints. The description does not add any parameter semantics beyond what the schema already contains, so the baseline score of 3 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 it generates keyframe animation videos by taking 2-10 keyframe images and producing smooth transitions. This identifies the specific function and distinguishes it from sibling tools like video_mix or video_frame.

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 when to use the tool (when you have 2-10 keyframe images) but does not provide explicit exclusions or mention alternative tools. It gives clear context but lacks explicit alternatives.

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