video_extract_frames

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'Extract frames' and 'Returns file paths only', implying it writes files and does not return binary data. However, it does not explain side effects (e.g., temporary file creation), permissions needed, or error handling.

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 extremely concise—two short sentences with no redundancy. Every word adds value.

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 has 8 parameters (1 required) and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the extraction modes, parameter constraints, or return format details. For a tool targeting AI vision agents, more context is needed.

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 parameter explanations. It only mentions the output format (JPEG/PNG/WebP) but fails to describe key parameters like 'mode' (interval vs count), 'quality', 'max_frames', or 'interval_sec'. This leaves ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 tool extracts frames from a video into image files (JPEG/PNG/WebP) for AI vision agents, and specifies it returns file paths only. This distinguishes it from siblings like video_compress and media_inspect.

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 indicates the tool is intended for AI vision agents but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like media_inspect or when to choose different extraction modes. No explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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