resolve_render_for_youtube

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses key behaviors: render location (local), upload suppression, prerequisite (existing absolute output directory), and return value ('Resolve's actual status'). It stops short of explaining synchronous vs. asynchronous rendering or error conditions, but the disclosed traits go beyond a one-line summary.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff: purpose, constraints, and return value. Each sentence earns its place, and the core differentiation (local, no upload) is front-loaded.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and return behavior. It doesn't clarify what happens if the preset is missing or whether rendering blocks, but these are minor gaps given the tool's low complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps meaningfully to all three parameters: 'existing absolute output directory' clarifies output_dir, 'a filename' clarifies filename, and 'installed Quick Export preset' clarifies preset's nature. It could add detail like file extension rules or full-path expectations, but it gives substantial semantic value beyond the bare schema.

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: 'Render locally with an installed Quick Export preset' and explicitly distinguishes itself by noting it 'disables uploading to YouTube.' This differentiates it from sibling render tools like resolve_quick_export and resolve_add_render_job without needing to inspect them.

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 gives clear context: this is for local renders with a Quick Export preset and explicitly no YouTube upload. This implies the right scenario for use, though it doesn't name specific alternatives or state when-not-to-use them. The 'explicitly disables uploading' is a strong contextual signal that selects this tool over upload-capable siblings.

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