Export render preset

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it states that the tool records a TOP to a file, writes via TouchDesigner, and documents expected codec/extension/fps. This complements the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) without contradicting them, though it does not cover every side effect (e.g., overwrite 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and includes meaningful specifics without redundancy. Every sentence adds value, covering both behavior and the preset list efficiently.

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 moderate complexity (6 params, no output schema), the description effectively communicates purpose, preset scope, and key behavior. It falls short of fully explaining prerequisites or lifecycle details (e.g., when stop is required), but the schema fills in parameter specifics.

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 coverage is 100% and all parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds some context (e.g., named presets, expected codecs for playback) but does not materially explain parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 the tool starts/stops a movie export using named presets, and specifies the resource (TOP recorded to file). It distinguishes from siblings like record_movie by mentioning the preset-driven approach and reuse of record_movie's recorder.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (preset-based exports with specific codecs) and mentions reuse of record_movie's recorder, implying it is the preset-focused alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name direct alternatives beyond the implicit reference.

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