roiq_montaje_edit

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

The description discloses that the process takes minutes, is autonomous (Director + render + revision con visión), and publishes results to the ROIQ OS chat. However, no annotations are provided, and the description omits important behavioral traits like whether it overwrites existing content, error handling, or required permissions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by time and outcome. No redundant information; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 (3 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the main process but lacks detail on prerequisites (sources must be listed first via roiq_montaje_list_sources, hinted in schema but not in description), error handling, and return value structure.

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 coverage is 67% (two out of three properties described). The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema; it relies on the schema's descriptions for 'inputs' and 'receta'. The 'title' parameter lacks description, but the tool description does not compensate.

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: 'Monta y edita un vídeo COMPLETO de forma autónoma', specifying verb ('monta y edita') and resource ('vídeo COMPLETO'). It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., roiq_montaje_list, roiq_montaje_approve) by emphasizing autonomous complete editing.

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 when to use the tool (for autonomous video editing) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. Sibling tools like roiq_montaje_correct suggest corrections, but no guidance is given for choosing between them.

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