ffmpeg_trim

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

The description notes the mutual exclusivity of end_time and duration, which is important. However, it does not disclose whether the original file is modified, or any error behavior (e.g., invalid times). No annotations are present to compensate.

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 with a clear structure: a one-line summary followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is relevant and 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 4-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers parameter usage but lacks information about supported video formats, error handling, and output details beyond a file path. The presence of an output schema partially mitigates Return documentation.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides clear explanations for each parameter, including examples for time formats and the mutual exclusivity condition, adding significant meaning beyond the 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 states 'Trim a video to extract a specific segment' with a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ffmpeg_extract_audio or ffmpeg_compress.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like ffmpeg_extract_frames or ffmpeg_convert. The description does not mention prerequisites or exclusions.

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