Analyze Video (Caption)

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'without uploading', the use of LVMM, and optional reasoning mode, but lacks details on limitations (e.g., video length, size, formats), error handling, or whether any data is persisted. The absence of these details reduces transparency.

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 highly concise: three sentences that front-load the core purpose and add context about the model and optional mode. Every sentence is substantive, with no fluff.

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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It describes the output as 'understand and describe video content' but doesn't specify format or structure. It also lacks details on error scenarios or response schema, making it adequate but incomplete for complex use.

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 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds context beyond the schema, such as 'without uploading' for video_url and 'reasoning mode for complex tasks' for thinking, enhancing parameter meaning.

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 the action ('Analyze a video from URL'), the resource (video), and a key differentiator ('without uploading to your library'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like caption_image and chat_with_video by specifying the input as a URL and the use of LVMM.

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 implicitly guides usage by noting it analyzes videos without uploading, contrasting with import tools. However, it does not explicitly list when to use alternatives like caption_image or chat_with_video, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusion cases.

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