media.video.regenerate

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Create a replacement video job' but does not explain whether this replaces an existing job, creates a new job, cancels prior work, is asynchronous, or requires previous generation results. The actual side effects are unknown.

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 wording. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though the brevity leaves key details unaddressed.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain the operation's inputs, effects, and return expectations. It does not mention what 'replacement video job' means, what 'one shot' refers to, or what happens after creation. The tool is likely useful only with external context not present in the description.

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 schema requires 'jobId' but does not define it in properties, and the description never mentions it. The phrase 'for one shot' hints at the target, but the description adds no meaning for the required parameter. The context signal showing 0 parameters conflicts with the required parameter, making clarification even more necessary.

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 states a clear action and resource: 'Create a replacement video job for one shot.' This is specific enough to distinguish the tool from media.video.generate, though 'one shot' is slightly ambiguous without more context about what a shot is.

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 explicit guidance is given about when to use this tool versus media.video.generate, media.job.run_once, or other job-related tools. 'Replacement' implies a redo scenario, but the conditions, prerequisites, or failure cases that should trigger this tool are not described.

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