filmora_open_export

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description usefully adds that it will not render, upload, or bypass license dialogs. However, it never explains why the operation is flagged destructive (e.g., which settings get changed) or the effect of setting fields, leaving the annotation's key implication unexplained.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, with the exclusion clauses immediately following. Every clause adds disambiguating value with no filler.

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 parameterless tool with annotations and no output schema, the description adequately conveys what happens (dialog opens, fields inspectable/settable) and what is out of scope. It could say more about which fields are exposed, but the dynamic dialog nature makes this a minor 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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is nominal, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed for a no-argument tool.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Open export settings') plus the follow-on capability ('inspect/set real fields'). It bounds scope against nearby concepts like rendering/uploading, though it does not name a sibling directly. An agent can distinguish this from filmora_open_panel or a hypothetical export/render tool.</Figure>

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 'Does not start rendering, upload, or bypass license dialogs' clause provides explicit when-not boundaries, telling the agent this opens a configuration surface rather than performing an export. It lacks named alternatives, so it stops short of a 5.

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