text_to_video

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It fails to mention whether the generation is synchronous or asynchronous, typical duration, resource consumption, or output details like file format or supported video length.

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?

Extremely concise (one sentence), but at the cost of completeness. For a tool with 2 high-level parameters and a nested object, more structure (e.g., listing key options) would be beneficial.

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 (nested payload, many optional fields), lack of output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to provide essential context for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (many params lack descriptions). The description adds no parameter details beyond the generic statement. It does not help the agent understand how to use the nested 'payload' object or the significance of optional parameters.

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 verb 'generate' and resource 'video' with the method 'from text prompt'. It conveys the core purpose, though it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'generate_video' or 'script_to_video' which may have overlapping functionality.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to prefer script_to_video). No prerequisites or context for appropriate usage are provided.

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