capcut_apply_chroma_key

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only says a cutout is applied and exposes intensity/shadow. It does not disclose whether the edit is destructive, whether it modifies the draft in place, what segment prerequisites exist, or what happens to the original background.

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?

One short front-loaded sentence with no filler; the 'Green Screen / Chroma Key' synonym pair is mildly redundant but does not materially hurt clarity.

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 a mutating tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is too thin: it omits usage boundaries, behavioral consequences, and enough context to pick safely among many sibling apply_* tools without relying on the name alone.

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 80% and the schema already explains color, intensity, shadow, and segmentId; the description merely repeats the names intensity and shadow without adding behavioral or range context. Baseline 3 applies since the schema carries the parameter meaning.

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?

States a specific action (Apply) on a specific resource (Green Screen / Chroma Key background cutout) and names the two key controls, so it is clearly distinguishable from sibling apply_* tools such as apply_effect or apply_mask.

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 use case is implied by 'Green Screen / Chroma Key background cutout' - an agent can infer this is for removing a solid-color background - but it neither names alternatives nor states when not to use it (e.g., versus apply_mask).

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