Update video metadata

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses that changing visibility to 'public' activates the share page, but does not mention any other behavioral traits (e.g., whether updates are immediate, require authentication, or have irreversible effects). The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences. It front-loads the key purpose and includes a specific use case. No extraneous information is present, though the second sentence could be seen as a bonus rather than essential. Overall, it is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more complete behavioral context. It does not explain what happens after an update (e.g., return value, side effects on other metadata), prerequisites (e.g., video must exist), or handling of complex parameters like ctaSettings. The description leaves significant gaps for an agent to operate effectively.

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 only 20% (only visibility has a description), yet the tool description merely rephrases the available fields without adding meaningful guidance on parameter usage. For instance, it does not explain that ctaSettings requires both label and url or that videoId is a required identifier. The description adds minimal value beyond the raw 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 clearly states that the tool updates video metadata (title, description, visibility, call-to-action button). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_video and delete_video by focusing on updates. The specific use case of flipping visibility to 'public' to activate the Synthesia share page provides clear, actionable 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?

The description implies this tool is for existing videos and gives a primary use case (making a video public). However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool or provide comparisons to similar siblings like create_video. The agent is left to infer usage context from the purpose alone.

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