mirror_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only states the core transformation and does not explain whether the tool writes a new file, honors output_path, overwrites the input, or preserves video properties such as duration and codec.

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 with no filler, front-loaded with the core operation. It is appropriately sized for a simple transformation tool.

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?

With 3 parameters, no annotations, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is too thin. It lacks guidance on path semantics, defaults, and side effects, even though the presence of an output schema covers return values.

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 while the phrase 'horizontally or vertically' clarifies possible direction values, it adds no meaning for the required input_path or the optional output_path. Most parameters remain undocumented.

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 the specific verb 'Mirror' with a clear resource ('a video') and the two axes 'horizontally or vertically.' This distinguishes it from siblings like rotate_video, crop_video, or resize_video at a glance.

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 intended use case is implied by the unique operation 'mirror,' but the description gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over related alternatives, and it provides no exclusions or conditions.

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