ingest_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 implies creation/indexing of a bundle but does not disclose side effects, whether ingestion is synchronous/asynchronous, permission requirements, duplicate handling, or expected duration.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is as concise as possible while still stating the core action and target artifact.

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 potentially complex ingestion tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 75% of parameters undocumented, the description is too thin. It omits behavioral details and parameter semantics needed to invoke the tool confidently.

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 only 25%, so the description needs to compensate. It clarifies the required url_or_path can be a local file or YouTube URL, but it says nothing about sync, embed_model, or whisper_model, leaving three parameters 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?

States a specific verb ("Ingest") and resource (video file or YouTube URL) and names the resulting artifact (searchable multimodal Vindex bundle). It is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_ingest_status or search_corpus.

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 description explains what the tool does but gives no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, follow-up status-checking, or when to prefer another sibling tool.

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