load_subtitle

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

Annotations already convey idempotency and destructiveness, and the description adds one useful behavioral detail: existing sync anchors are preserved by default. This hints that a reset option can change that behavior, but it does not explain what actually gets destroyed or when, so the disclosure is partial.

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 two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence earns its place, making it appropriately concise for a lightweight tool definition.

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?

With three parameters, zero schema descriptions, and no output schema, this description is too sparse for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. It omits how store_id is used, what format subtitle expects, what reset_anchors resets, and what the result or side effects beyond default anchor preservation are.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the three parameters, but it never names store_id, subtitle, or reset_anchors. It only indirectly hints at reset_anchors through 'sync anchors are preserved by default', and the tool name/description minimally clarifies the subtitle parameter.

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 a specific verb ('selects') and resource ('subtitle') with the context 'for content', making the tool's core function clear. It is implicitly distinct from siblings like list_subtitles and translate_subtitle, though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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 given about when to use this tool versus siblings such as list_subtitles, translate_subtitle, or calibrate_sync. The phrase 'for content' provides weak context, but there are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-routing instructions.

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