get_video_detail

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does reveal the return shape (dict with statistics, author info, URLs), which is useful behavioral context. However, it omits auth requirements (relevant given the check_login_status sibling), behavior for invalid or nonexistent IDs, and error handling.

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?

Docstring-style layout with a one-sentence purpose, an Args line, and a Returns line — scannable and free of filler. Each line earns its place, though the purpose line and Returns section overlap slightly in what they promise.

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 one-parameter read tool with an output schema present, the main contract is documented: what it does, what the parameter means, and roughly what it returns. Missing pieces are sibling differentiation, auth needs, and error behavior, which an agent would need to invoke it reliably in a real Douyin session.

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% and the schema only types aweme_id as a bare string. The description compensates by clarifying it is 'the video/aweme ID' and a 'numeric string', adding both semantic role and format. It stops short of an example or guidance on where to obtain the ID, but the core meaning is conveyed.

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?

Uses a specific verb+resource ('Get detailed information about a Douyin video') and enumerates the concrete payload (title, description, statistics, author info, URLs). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_video_comments, get_homefeed, and get_user_info, whose scopes are narrower or focus on different resources.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools. It never references get_video_comments, search_videos, or get_homefeed as alternatives, and states no exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and return payload.

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