omni_video_render

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It lists applied operations and notes return of a path, but does not disclose side effects like file writing at output_path, auth requirements, or potential destructive behavior.

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?

A single sentence efficiently lists the tool's actions and return value. It is front-loaded with the verb 'orchestrates'. Could be slightly improved by separating the list for readability.

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, the description covers the high-level pipeline and key parameters. It lacks details on EDL JSON structure or output schema, but the separate schema and output schema exist to fill gaps, making it nearly 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?

The description maps 'EDL cuts' to edl_json, 'LUT color grading' to lut_path, and 'subtitle burning' to subtitle_style, adding context beyond the schema. However, it omits output_path and mentions overlay graphics/audio restoration not directly reflected in parameters.

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 orchestrates the final render pipeline, listing specific operations (EDL cuts, overlay graphics, LUT grading, audio restoration, subtitle burning) and returns the output path. It distinctly separates from sibling tools like omni_video_preview by focusing on the final render stage.

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 as the final render step after other pipeline stages, but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, particularly differentiating from omni_video_preview which may serve as a preview step.

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