media_tools

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the baseline is lower; the description adds that update shells out to `yt-dlp -U` and that convert produces a new local file. It omits what install actually touches on disk, whether convert overwrites an existing output path, and whether network access or elevated permissions are needed.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the action list and parenthesizes per-action detail, wasting no words. It is arguably over-packed for one sentence, but nothing extraneous is present.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description could say more about what status returns and what convert produces, and it never mentions error cases or prerequisites for install/update. For a four-action multiplexer with an undocumented path pair, it is adequate but leaves real 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?

With 0% schema description coverage the description must carry parameter meaning, and it only partially does: it maps the four action values and enumerates target formats (mp4 H.264 / ProRes / mp3 / wav / gif / audio extraction, matching the enum including m4a). The `input` and `output` path parameters get no explanation at all — no path format, no relative-vs-absolute guidance, no default output location.

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 names four concrete actions and what each does (status reports yt-dlp/ffmpeg paths and versions, install sets up dependencies, update bumps yt-dlp via -U, convert transcodes a local file), which is far more specific than the tool name alone. It does not explicitly contrast itself with nearby siblings like media_info or media_youtubeDownload, so differentiation is left implicit.

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?

Useful cues exist ('update ... fixes most YouTube errors' implies you run it when downloads break), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs media_info/media_youtubeDownload guidance, no prerequisites for install, and no statement of when convert is preferable to importing and letting another tool handle encoding.

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