video_trim

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool trims and creates a new file, but fails to mention what happens to the original, output format, or any side effects.

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 very short and to the point, but it ends abruptly with 'e.g.' without completing the thought. It is concise but not fully structured.

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 likely requires input parameters (time ranges), the empty schema and incomplete description make it impossible for an agent to invoke correctly. There is no output schema, and the description lacks details on file handling or result format.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, yet the description implies time ranges in milliseconds are needed. This contradiction means the description fails to provide actual parameter semantics, making the tool unusable as specified.

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 trims a video to one or more time ranges and concatenates them into a new file. However, it ends with 'e.g.' without providing an example, and it does not differentiate from the sibling 'video_concat' tool beyond implying trimming vs concatenation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like video_concat or video_export_gif. There are no usage conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned.

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