preview_keyframe_selection_seek

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should carry the full behavioral burden. '預覽' implies a read-only preview, but the definition does not state side effects, permissions, remote-seek implications, or anything about how the preview behaves.

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?

It is a single compact sentence with no filler, but for a six-parameter tool it is too terse to be usefully front-loaded. Brevity comes at the cost of clarity rather than through efficient information packing.

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 six parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but essential information about parameter meaning and safe invocation is missing.

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% and the description does not explain any of the six parameters. The term 'margin' loosely hints at right_margin_sec, but scene_points, duration, min_gap_sec, max_window_sec, and left_candidates are entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 states a specific action ('預覽' / preview) and a resource ('seek 版的 margin 截斷結果'), and adds the scenario '遠程 seek'. However, 'margin 截斷結果' is jargon-heavy and the distinction from the sibling preview_keyframe_selection is only implied by 'seek 版', not made explicit.

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 parenthetical '遠程 seek 場景' gives a minimal usage context, but it does not say when to choose this tool over preview_keyframe_selection, nor does it state prerequisites or exclusions. An agent must infer the selection rule from the name alone.

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