veo_upscale_4k

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the operation takes 5-10 minutes and requires a prerequisite taskId, providing some transparency about latency and dependency. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authorization needs, or result format, leaving gaps.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that deliver the core purpose, time expectation, and prerequisite. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy or filler.

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 has four parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to handle the output (e.g., where the upscaled video is saved) or the role of parameters like 'index' and 'download_dir'. While the purpose and prerequisite are clear, additional context about workflow integration is missing.

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 coverage is 75% (three of four parameters have descriptions), but the tool description adds no new information about how to use the parameters. For example, 'filename' lacks a schema description and is not explained in the description. The description does not compensate for missing parameter details, so value beyond schema is minimal.

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 this tool upsamples a Veo 3.1 video to 4K resolution, distinguishing it from the sibling 'veo_upscale_1080p' which targets a different resolution. The verb 'Upscale' and resource 'Veo 3.1 video to 4K' are specific and actionable.

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 a prerequisite ('Requires taskId from completed Veo generation') and a time estimate, implying it should be used after a Veo generation. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'veo_upscale_1080p' or state when not to use this tool. The usage context is clear but lacks exclusion guidance.

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