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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions one-step recording but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or behavior for existing files. The behavioral information is minimal and vague.

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 and front-loaded, but the example is helpful. However, it lacks structured information about parameters, and the conciseness comes at the cost of completeness. Could be improved without much extraneous text.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has 5 parameters and the description only addresses one. Missing details on output format, overwrite behavior, and parameter options make it incomplete for reliable use.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only mentions the 'path' parameter via an example. It fails to explain 'axis', 'frames', 'degrees', and 'framerate', which are left to the agent to infer from defaults or context. This is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 purpose: record a full turntable spin and save as video in one step. It provides aliases (turntable video, spin video, etc.) and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'spin' and 'start_recording' by emphasizing the one-step nature.

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 implies when to use this tool (instead of separate spin and recording steps) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives. No direct guidance on prerequisites or scenarios.

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