filmora_commands

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

With annotations already declaring a safe read operation, the description adds useful behavioral context: unavailable and ambiguous commands are excluded by default unless explicitly requested. That filtering behavior is not evident from the annotations or schema, though return format and version-resolution details are not described.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by the key default behavior. There is no wasted text.

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?

For a lookup tool with three optional parameters, no schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It explains the unavailable-command default but leaves the query and group parameters unexplained and does not describe what a returned shortcut/command entry contains.

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 needs to compensate for three undocumented parameters. It only clarifies the include_unavailable behavior indirectly and says nothing about what 'group' or 'query' mean or how they filter results.

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 gives a verb ('Find') and a resource ('version-resolved shortcuts'), but 'shortcuts' is not clearly the same as the tool name 'commands' and it does not distinguish this lookup tool from the sibling 'filmora_command'. The omission behavior adds some specificity, but the core purpose remains somewhat vague.

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?

It mentions that unavailable/ambiguous commands are omitted unless requested, which explains the include_unavailable parameter, but it gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus filmora_command or other siblings. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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