Decupar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the tool detects scenes and extracts frames, but does not state if it is read-only, destructive, or requires specific permissions. Lacks details on side effects or limitations.

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 concise (one sentence) and front-loads the purpose. However, given the complexity of the tool (8 parameters), it is too brief and lacks necessary structural details like parameter explanations or output format.

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 does not explain the return value format of the navigable log, and there is no output schema. It also fails to contextualize the tool among siblings or provide enough information for the agent to correctly invoke it with appropriate parameters.

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 only 13% (1 of 8 parameters documented). The description does not explain any parameters beyond the high-level purpose. For a tool with many parameters, the description should add meaning, but it fails to do so.

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: it detects scenes, extracts one representative frame per shot, and returns a navigable content log. This distinguishes it from siblings like detect_scenes (only scene detection) or extract_frames (only frame extraction).

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 usage for quick content overview without scrubbing, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., detect_scenes, extract_frames). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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