Edit video brief

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that only provided fields change, that certain changes trigger a re-render returning a new run ID, and that publishTarget updates without re-render. It could mention side effects like cost or asset invalidation, but the key behaviors are covered.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and every sentence adds value. It efficiently covers partial update behavior, re-render triggers, and the alternative tool.

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 the tool's complexity (14 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers the key decision points: what changes trigger a re-render and the alternative for new videos. It could explain return format more, but the mention of 'new run ID' is sufficient for most uses.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds cross-cutting context about re-render triggers and run ID returns, but most parameter details are already in the schema. No significant additional semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 'Edit an existing job's brief' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling tool create_video_brief by explicitly saying 'For a brand-new video use create_video_brief.'

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 guidance on when to use this tool (editing an existing job) and names the alternative for new videos. It also clarifies behavioral context, such as which field changes trigger a re-render and which do not.

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