Analyze Video Interlacing

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

The description claims 'Read-only delivery preflight' while the annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false — a soft inconsistency worth flagging, since the server evidently considers the tool non-read-only (it likely spawns an FFmpeg decode process). Beyond that claim the description adds no behavioral context: no mention of cost/runtime, temp-file or decode side effects, or sample_seconds impact on execution time.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the classification taxonomy up front and the usage framing trailing. Nothing to trim.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the enumerable result categories are given inline. The only gap is the unstated execution profile implied by sample_seconds and the unresolved read-only framing.

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 100%, so media_path and sample_seconds (1-300s, default 30) are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameter semantics; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Specific verb ('Classify') plus resource ('decoded video frames') and an enumerated set of outputs (progressive, top-field-first, bottom-field-first, mixed, undetermined), with the underlying mechanism named (FFmpeg idet). This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like set_sequence_field_type (a mutation) and analyze_video_qc (broader QC).

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?

'Read-only delivery preflight' implies the context of use, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or routing to alternatives such as inspect_media_streams or analyze_video_qc, which also surface media characteristics. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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