Slideshow from images

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 adds key details: 'Images are fitted to the first image's size' and 'shown in order for a fixed number of seconds each.' However, it does not mention potential overwrite behavior or audio handling (only in schema), so it's not fully comprehensive.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every word contributes. It efficiently covers the core purpose, timing, optional audio, and image-fitting behavior without 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 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the main functionality and key behavior. It does not explain the output path (.mp4) or audio trimming (both only in schema), but these are minor gaps. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what the tool does.

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%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that image order matters ('shown in order'), that the number of seconds is fixed per image, and that an optional soundtrack can be added. This reinforces and clarifies the parameter usage.

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 starts with 'Build a video from a list of images' – a specific verb and resource that clearly defines the tool's function. It further distinguishes from siblings like create_gif by specifying 'shown in order for a fixed number of seconds each, optionally with a soundtrack.'

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 this is for creating slideshow-style videos from images, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., create_gif for GIFs, stack_videos for side-by-side). No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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