Music video specs by platform

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does convey that this is a static rules lookup with no side effects by framing it as 'rules' by platform. However, it says nothing about whether the values are fixed or dynamic, or how to treat a platform not in the listed set, which matters for a zero-annotation tool.

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 sentences, no filler. The returned fields lead, and the valid platform values follow immediately, which is exactly the order an agent needs them.

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 one-parameter read-only reference tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned and what inputs are valid. It could go slightly further by sketching the response shape per platform, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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?

The schema documents its single parameter and its empty-string behavior, but the description supplies the concrete accepted platform values (spotify-canvas, tiktok, instagram-reels, youtube-shorts, youtube) that the schema lacks entirely since no enum is defined. That is genuine added meaning beyond the structured field.

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 the exact data returned (aspect ratio, resolution, length, format rules) and enumerates the five supported platforms, so an agent knows precisely what this lookup yields. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like plan_music_video or make_spotify_canvas, but the reference-data purpose is unmistakable.

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 rather than stated: an agent can infer this is a pre-flight lookup consulted before generating a video, and the platform list signals valid inputs. There is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisite, and no pointer to the sibling tools that actually create the content.

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