add_text_graphic

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and largely drops it. It does not say whether an active sequence is required, whether the tool creates or returns a graphic object whose identifier is needed for later styling, or what happens when trackIndex is invalid or the track is occupied at startTime.

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 filler. It is efficient and easy to parse, though its brevity contributes to the missing context elsewhere rather than being deliberately selective.

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 ten-parameter timeline mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the definition is thin. It leaves out sequence prerequisites, the relationship to style_text_graphic (likely the follow-up call on the created graphic), and any hint of the return value, which the agent would need to chain calls.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all ten parameters including units and coordinate normalization. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, which makes the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 ('Add') and specific resource ('text graphic / Essential Graphics') with its destination ('to the timeline'). It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like style_text_graphic, add_mogrt_to_timeline, or add_tiktok_caption, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone which of these to reach for.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus add_mogrt_to_timeline or style_text_graphic, nor any prerequisite such as needing an active sequence or a valid video track. The agent must infer all of this from the name and schema alone.

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