merge_videos

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'concatenate multiple videos sequentially' and does not mention whether the operation is non-destructive, what happens to audio tracks, how output is generated when output_path is empty, or any side effects.

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 a single sentence of five words, front-loading the essential action with no filler or redundancy. It is maximally concise and well-structured for a tool of this simplicity.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description does not explain the output_path default behavior, the minimum number of input videos required, or how the result differs from sibling merge/crossfade operations. For a tool with no annotations and a 0% schema coverage, this is a significant completeness gap.

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 only loosely maps to input_paths via 'multiple videos'. It provides no explanation of output_path, its default value, or the fact that ordering in input_paths likely determines the concatenation order. This is insufficient compensation for the absent schema descriptions.

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 uses a specific verb 'concatenate' and resource 'multiple videos' with the adverb 'sequentially', making the core operation clear. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like crossfade_videos or create_slideshow_video, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no context about when to choose merge_videos over alternatives such as crossfade_videos or create_slideshow_video. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or use-case guidance, so the agent must infer applicability 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.