transcode_video

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

Discloses key behaviors beyond annotations: async processing, immediate job_id return, wallet debit on completion, source constraints. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false).

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?

Description is concise with 4 sentences, front-loading the main action. Slightly verbose with polling flow, but overall efficient and structured.

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?

Covers purpose, constraints, async flow, and side effects. With an output schema (not shown), return values need not be detailed. Lacks failure/error handling info, but still fairly complete for a complex tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not elevate.

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's purpose: offload video transcoding to a server-side service. It identifies the verb 'transcode' and the resource 'video', and distinguishes from siblings like convert_file or transcode_from_url by emphasizing async execution and specific constraints.

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?

Provides clear usage context: source must be ≤10 min and ≤5 GB, polling instructions, wallet debit. However, does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like transcode_from_url for URL inputs.

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