katto_create_clip_job

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

Annotations only state readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, so the description carries the burden of explaining effects. It clearly discloses that the call consumes 1 video from monthly quota, is asynchronous, returns a job id, and fails on unsupported URLs or videos over 90 minutes.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds quota, async behavior, polling, and failure conditions in a logical order.

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 an async creation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential operational details: what is submitted, quota consumption, how the result is returned (job id), how to check completion, and key failure modes. An agent has enough to invoke it correctly and manage the follow-up workflow.

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%, giving baseline credit for parameter clarity. The description adds meaningful context for the 'url' parameter by enumerating supported platforms and imposing the 90-minute limit, though it does not elaborate on the optional 'config' object beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Submit a long video ... for clipping' and names the supported platforms. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like katto_get_job and katto_cancel_job by describing the creation flow that returns a job id.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: check katto_get_usage before calling, and poll katto_get_job after. It also notes constraints like unsupported URLs and the 90-minute limit, but does not explicitly describe when to prefer this over related tools like katto_rerender_clip or katto_dub_clip.

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