Film production guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered and the description does not contradict it. The description adds context on what content the guide delivers (its workflow scope), but says nothing about return size, pagination, or how section content is retrieved beyond the schema.

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?

Front-loads the purpose, then the usage condition, then the parameter note. The long parenthetical enumerating workflow stages is dense but legitimately signals scope; it is a bit run-on but not wasteful.

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 read-only, single-parameter guide tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, when to call it, and what the parameter selects. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing, though the return shape of the skill content is left implicit.

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% and the single 'section' parameter is fully documented with examples. The description's 'Omit section for the main guide' merely restates what the schema already says, so this is a baseline 3.

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 purpose: it is the 'axcel-film-studio skill,' a step-by-step guide for making a multi-scene AI film, and enumerates the workflow stages it covers. An agent can tell this is a documentation/guide tool rather than a media-generation sibling, though it never names an alternative to differentiate itself explicitly.

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?

'Call it before starting a film when your client has no skills support' gives a concrete trigger condition and timing (before starting). It does not state a when-not-to-use case or name any competing tool, but the conditional context is clear enough to route the agent.

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