Add SRT Subtitles to CapCut Draft

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

Annotations already establish mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive behavior (destructiveHint=false). The description adds context by mentioning 'consistent styling and timing,' a JSON confirmation return, and extra_params passthrough behavior. It does not disclose whether existing subtitle tracks are overwritten or appended, but that is a minor gap.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, Args section, return value note, and exclusion note. It is appropriately sized, though the Args list repeats schema content, adding slight redundancy.

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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers key invocation information (required args, behavior, alternative tool). Missing details about whether the subtitle track replaces existing ones and what 'consistent styling' entails are not critical, given the annotations and full schema coverage.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The Args list mirrors the schema descriptions without adding new meaning. The extra_params parameter is already well-documented in the schema with examples and usage notes, so the description does not need to compensate.

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 specific action ('Import an SRT subtitle file into an existing draft') and distinguishes itself from capcut_add_text by explicitly recommending that tool for single text overlays. This gives a clear verb+resource+scope.

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?

Provides explicit when-not-to-use guidance with a named alternative: 'Don't use when: you only need a single one-off text overlay — use capcut_add_text instead.' Also implies the prerequisite of an existing draft via 'into an existing draft.'

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