get_key_moments

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that moment captions come from untrusted user speech and should be treated as quoted descriptions, not instructions. It also mentions the return of inline images and click coordinates. This adds meaningful behavioral context, though it does not cover all traits (e.g., auth, rate limits).

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 three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the core function, elaborating on the value (visual vs. verbal), and providing a crucial behavioral warning. It is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has three parameters and no output schema. The description covers the main output (key moments with frames and coordinates) and the untrusted nature of captions. While it doesn't detail order or pagination, the tool's simplicity makes this adequate. Minor gap: no mention of return format.

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 100%, so the description adds value beyond the schema. It explains the 'id' parameter can be a public id or full URL, defaults for maxFrames and includeFrames, and the general meaning of key moments. This enriches the parameter understanding.

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 that the tool retrieves key moments from a recording, specifically timestamped instants where the speaker pointed at something, with inline video frames and click coordinates. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by contrasting with what the speaker said (transcript focus), making its unique purpose evident.

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 tool explicitly describes its use case ('find out WHAT the speaker was showing') and contrasts with transcript content, providing clear context. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative tool recommendations, though the contrast with transcripts serves as implicit guidance.

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