media.storyboard.plan

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

There are no annotations, so the description must convey side effects or constraints. It only states a planning action, giving no indication of whether this creates resources, modifies project state, or is read-only. The lack of any behavioral disclosure leaves the agent guessing about consequences.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently communicates the core action and a key constraint (shot duration), earning high marks for brevity and 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?

Given the sparse schema (empty properties) and lack of annotations, the description does not provide enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly. It omits parameter meanings, output format, and any relationship to other tools, making it incomplete for practical invocation.

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 lists required fields (projectId, totalDurationSec) but the properties object is empty, so no parameter descriptions exist. The description does not mention these parameters or explain their purpose, leaving the agent without any semantic understanding of how to fill them.

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: planning a multi-shot storyboard with a specific shot duration limit. This is specific enough to distinguish it from generic 'plan' tools, though it lacks detail on the output and how the storyboard is structured.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or relationships with sibling tools like media.compose or media.video.generate. The agent receives no context for selecting this tool.

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