generate_video

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

Discloses slowness and the need for user confirmation, which are key behavioral traits. Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, so description adds value. However, it omits details like whether it consumes significant resources, cost implications, or rate limits.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 complexity (11 params, no output schema, no parameter descriptions), the description is severely lacking. It covers only authentication and slowness, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool correctly.

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 11 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but provides zero information about any parameter. User cannot infer what 'tier', 'model', 'duration', etc., mean from the description alone.

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 the action ('Generate') and the resource ('AI video') with the specific provider 'LemGen'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like generate_image by specifying video generation. No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly states that videos are slow and require explicit user confirmation, providing strong usage guidance. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., generate_image for images).

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