capcut_add_subtitles_batch

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool adds subtitles with styling, but doesn't disclose that it mutates the draft, how it interacts with existing text tracks, or whether it overwrites or merges content. This is a meaningful gap for a tool that edits a draft.

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 compact sentence with no filler, and the primary action is front-loaded. It earns its place, though its brevity contributes to the lack of behavioral and usage context scored elsewhere.

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?

For an 8-parameter batch edit with no annotations and no output schema, this one-liner is too sparse. It doesn't clarify what 'draft' must refer to, how subtitle timing fields like durSec and endSec interact, or what happens to the draft after the operation.

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 88% description coverage, so parameters are mostly self-documenting. The description's mention of 'typography styling, outline strokes, and positions' loosely maps to fontSize, color, strokeWidth, strokeColor, and posY, but adds no deeper semantic meaning 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 action ('Bulk add') and resource ('Burmese/English subtitles'), and mentions typography, outline strokes, and positions. It is specific and understandable, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like add_text or add_dynamic_captions.

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 word 'Bulk' implies this is for adding multiple subtitles at once, giving some usage context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when not to use it, and no reference to alternatives among the many sibling tools.

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