generate_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses download behavior, model-specific costs, and upstream pauses. However, it does not mention potential failure modes, rate limits, or authentication requirements, which would be useful for a generation tool.

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 dense and information-rich, but it is quite long and could be overwhelming. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides a model guide, which is useful but could be better structured with bullet points or sections. Every sentence adds value, but the length may reduce readability.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers model selection, async mode, and output location well. It lacks details on model_options structure and error handling, but the pointer to list_models for exploration helps fill gaps.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining model selection trade-offs and the async wait behavior, which complements the schema. It also clarifies the download_dir default and the working directory caveat, which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 generates videos using kie.ai with 86+ models and specifies the output location. It distinguishes itself from siblings by covering video generation specifically, while other tools handle music, audio, or extensions.

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 provides extensive guidance on when to use which model, including cost, speed, and use-case recommendations. It also explicitly mentions alternatives like veo_extend and runway_extend for video extension, and notes that Sora 2 is paused, preventing misuse.

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