About afterAI and how to get access

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'explains' content, indicating a non-destructive, informational read-only operation, but it does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or response format. This adds some transparency but is not comprehensive.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose without extraneous information. It earns a top score for conciseness.

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?

The tool has no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description is the sole source of context. It adequately covers the tool's purpose and scope, explaining what it does and what topics it addresses. This is complete for a simple informational tool.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description is not required to elaborate on parameter meaning. The description mentions edit options and API keys, but these are content topics, not parameters. Baseline score of 4 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'explains' and identifies the resource 'afterAI', covering what it does, edit options, and access details. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools check_status and edit_video, which perform actions rather than provide information.

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 implies the tool should be used when the user needs introductory information about afterAI, its edit options, or how to obtain an API key and plan. It provides clear context without needing exclusions, although it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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