Analyze video

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, openWorldHint true, and destructiveHint false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond this: it mentions 'Costs ~a transcription call,' which warns about resource consumption. It also specifies the outputs (transcript, beat list, timestamps) without contradicting any annotation.

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 sentences, no fluff. Front-loaded with the core function, then adds usage context and cost. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure is efficient.

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 tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (transcript, beat list, duration, timestamps) and the expected use case. It even mentions cost, which helps the agent plan. Nothing critical is missing.

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 parameter is already documented ('the video URL...'). The description does not add extra meaning about the parameter itself. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema fully covers it.

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 states a specific verb ('Break down') and resource ('video ad'), and precisely lists what it produces: verbatim transcript, beat list, duration, and sampled frame timestamps. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like finish_video or clip_video, which have different purposes.

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 context: 'Use to study a reference/competitor ad before remixing its structure.' This clearly indicates when to use it. It does not mention alternatives or when not to use, but for a single-purpose analysis tool, the guidance is sufficient.

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