process_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the pipeline (audio extraction, Whisper transcription, keyframe extraction, JSON output) but does not mention potential side effects like output file creation, required external tools, or failure behaviors. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, listing concrete steps and output. No redundant words, every part contributes to understanding.

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 output schema exists (though not displayed), return values are covered. The description covers the main workflow but lacks guidance on when to use and parameter usage. For a moderate-complexity tool with no annotations, this is mostly complete with minor 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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not explain the parameters (output_dir, vault_path, extract_frames) or how they relate to the described process. It only mentions the pipeline steps, leaving undocumented parameters, so the description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the specific actions: extract audio, transcribe with Whisper, extract scene keyframes, and return a timestamp-aligned JSON payload. It names a specific verb ('process') and resource ('onboarding video'), and is clearly distinct from siblings like set_vault_path or write_obsidian_note.

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 implies usage for onboarding videos but provides no explicit when-to-use or alternative statements. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or cases where this tool should not be used. The context is clear enough, but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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