set_asset_preview_image_from_time

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It states the core action but omits side effects (e.g., permanent overwrite, behavior on non-video assets), permissions required, or error conditions. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the resource type and action. It contains no unnecessary wording and is easy to parse.

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?

For a simple two-parameter setter, the description provides the core function and parameter meaning. However, it lacks details on prerequisites, error handling, or return values. Given the low schema coverage, a bit more context would be helpful, but the essential purpose is clear.

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 schema only generically describes 'id' as 'ID of the resource' and leaves 'seconds' entirely undescribed. The tool description adds meaning by clarifying id as the video asset and seconds as the frame time offset, providing necessary context that compensates for the schema's low coverage.

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 identifies the action: set the poster/preview image of a video asset from a specific frame time. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_asset or set_asset_custom_meta.

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 usage for video assets but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks exclusion criteria or context for selection among other asset-related tools.

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