cueprecise_set_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions storing data and server-side decisions on boundaries, but does not disclose whether existing data is overwritten, what the return value is, or potential error conditions.

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 two concise sentences with no extraneous information, effectively communicating the core behavior and constraints.

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?

The description lacks essential context: it does not explain what a 'cueprecise_summary packet' is, how video_id and fingerprint relate, or what success/failure looks like. Given the nested schema and no annotations, this is insufficient for confident use.

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 has no descriptions for video_id, fingerprint, or content, and the description only references the summary packet without explaining the expected structure or semantics of the content object, leaving parameter meaning largely ambiguous.

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 validates and stores a structured summary based on the cueprecise_summary packet, and explicitly notes that chapter boundaries and timestamps are determined by the server, which defines its core purpose.

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 by referencing the cueprecise_summary packet and server-determined boundaries, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools (e.g., cueprecise_set_chapter_titles) or state when this tool should be preferred over alternatives.

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