assemble_product_spot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies the tool creates a timeline but does not mention side effects like whether it modifies the current project, creates a new sequence, or requires specific permissions. This is a gap for an agent.

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, no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the key purpose and the two modes of operation.

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 description is brief and lacks details about what happens after execution (e.g., whether a new sequence is created, if it returns a reference, or if it modifies existing project state). Given the tool's complexity, more context might be needed for an agent to use it 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?

The schema already provides descriptions for all parameters (100% coverage). The description adds context about template defaults vs. explicit clipPlan, but it does not significantly enhance understanding of individual parameters beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: building a production-oriented promo timeline from media assets. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning the explicit clipPlan for LLM-directed control, which is unique to this tool.

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?

It explains when to use this tool (when building a promo timeline) and mentions the choice between template defaults and an explicit clipPlan, giving clear guidance on how to leverage the tool. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient.

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