analyze_local_video

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only mentions using the Files API without explaining side effects, file handling, or lifecycle (e.g., whether videos are cached or deleted). This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 short with a clear one-line summary followed by a parameter list. It is well-structured and avoids redundancy, though the docstring format is slightly less natural than prose.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the tool is relatively simple (4 params, no nested objects), the description covers the core functionality and usage modes. It could mention error handling or file size limits but remains sufficient for basic invocation.

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 must compensate. It adds brief meanings (e.g., 'Local video file path', 'Analysis instruction', 'Gemini model to use') but provides no format constraints, examples, or additional context beyond the parameter names.

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 clearly states it analyzes local video files using the Files API, and the phrase 'local video' distinguishes it from siblings like analyze_youtube_video. The verb 'analyze' with 'local video' specifies the resource and action unambiguously.

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 mentions 'Single-shot or session-integrated', indicating when to use session_id vs standalone. It does not explicitly contrast with analyze_video_in_session, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate usage.

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