resize_video

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the action without mentioning side effects (e.g., file overwriting), required permissions, or performance implications. The return value description is minimal ('调整结果信息' – adjustment result info) and lacks specifics.

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 short but not optimally structured. It begins with a purpose line followed by an Args/Returns section, which is acceptable. However, it could be more concise by integrating the parameter explanations into the purpose statement, and the Returns section adds little 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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain default behavior for optional parameters, error handling, or the output file's location when output_path is null. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool reliably.

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 description lists parameters with brief Chinese labels that mirror the schema titles (e.g., '输入视频文件路径' for input_path). No additional context is provided about valid ranges for width/height, the effect of keep_aspect_ratio, or how output_path is used when omitted. Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 '调整视频分辨率' (adjust video resolution), which directly conveys the tool's function. Among siblings, resizing is distinct from compressing, converting, or extracting, so purpose is clear, though no explicit differentiation is provided.

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 compress_video or convert_video_format. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or appropriate contexts for resizing.

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