trim_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does not state whether the original file is modified, whether a new file is always created, what happens if output_path is empty, or how the video container/streams are handled. The bare 'Trim' phrasing leaves important behavioral traits unstated.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the operation and the key information (trim by time range) is front-loaded.

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 large sibling list and lack of annotations, this description is too thin for reliable agent selection and invocation. It does not clarify output_path default behavior, units beyond 'seconds', or how trimming relates to other cutting/editing tools, leaving meaningful gaps.

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%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It only clarifies that start and end are seconds, but does not explain input_path semantics, output_path optionality/default behavior, or the relationship between start/end and the output file.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Trim a video') with the specific operation 'between start and end seconds', which conveys the time-based nature of the cut. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related sibling tools like split_video or crop_video, so it is not a full 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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as split_video, crop_video, or reverse_video. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate selection context.

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