resolve_find_shots_by_visual_description

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses cloud transmission, one-frame-per-clip sampling with a 50-clip ceiling, the possibility of misses, analysis of the visible composite including overlays/upper tracks, temporary playhead/page movement, and restoration-status reporting.

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?

Four compact sentences deliver purpose, mechanism, limitations, side effects, and return information with no filler. The key sampling limitation is front-loaded, and every sentence contributes useful information.

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 that there are no annotations and no output schema, the description still covers method, side effects, return summary, and limitations well. The only notable gap is the missing explicit parameter semantics, which keeps it from being fully self-contained.

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%, so the description must compensate for all parameters. It clearly conveys object_description via the airplane example and hints at sampling limits, but max_clips and track_index are never explicitly tied to behavior. An agent cannot tell exactly how track_index changes the analysis or how max_clips interacts with the stated 50-clip ceiling.

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 verb and resource: 'Look for objects such as an airplane in timeline shots using Moondream.' It clearly distinguishes this from single-frame tools by framing it as a search across timeline shots, and the closing 'not exhaustive source-media search' further differentiates its 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?

It gives clear context: this searches timeline shots by sampling one midpoint frame per clip, and it explicitly warns it may miss objects. It also states a when-not: it is not an exhaustive source-media search. However, it does not name a specific sibling tool to use instead, so it stops short of a 5.

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