convert_format

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the key behavior of inferring output format from the output_path extension, which is valuable. However, it does not mention overwrite behavior, codec defaults, or whether input is modified, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the main purpose and add one essential detail about extension inference. No filler or 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 simple two-parameter tool, the description covers the core purpose and format determination. However, it lacks explicit guidance on use cases, potential side effects (e.g., overwriting), and error handling, making it adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Input schema fully documents both parameters with detailed descriptions of path resolution relative to MEDIA_DIR. Since coverage is 100%, the description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline.

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 a specific verb+resource ('Convert a video/audio file to a different container/codec') and differentiates from sibling tools by focusing on format conversion rather than specific operations like trimming or extraction. The extension inference detail reinforces the purpose.

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 clear context for when to use the tool (converting file formats/containers), but does not explicitly name exclusions or alternatives. The use case is implied and distinct from siblings, though no explicit when-not guidance is given.

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