get_shot_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It reveals the kinds of content returned, but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, whether permissions are required, or what limitations apply.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant padding. The parenthetical 'VideoTree/VideoAgent' is somewhat jargon-heavy, but overall the structure is efficient.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description needs to compensate by explaining parameters and return behavior. It partially describes return contents but leaves all parameter semantics undocumented, making it incomplete for a three-parameter retrieval tool.

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% for three parameters, and the description does not explain video_sha256, shot_id, or neighbor_shots. It only hints at 'shot' and 'adjacent neighbor shots,' leaving parameter formats, required status, and the default neighbor count 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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'expand a shot' and inspect neighbor shots, keyframe paths, filmstrips, and transcript. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings such as get_transcript, which also provides transcript content.

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?

Usage is implied by 'expand a shot to inspect...', which suggests retrieving richer context around a shot. However, it does not state when to use this tool instead of get_transcript or search_corpus, nor does it give exclusions or prerequisites.

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