check_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses cost behavior ('Free to call'), link expiry ('valid for one hour'), and the fact that it returns status before completion. Minor omissions like status values or explicit polling guidance are acceptable for a simple check 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?

Two compact sentences front-load the purpose and then state the return behavior and cost. Every phrase earns its place with no filler.

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 one-parameter status check, the description provides the essential context: what it checks, what it returns, link validity, and cost. A small gap is the lack of detail on status values or polling behavior, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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 single required parameter is fully described in the schema ('The id generate_video returned'), and the description reinforces that origin. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds no significant new parameter semantics.

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 names the specific operation ('Check a generation'), the resource it acts on ('started by generate_video'), and the key return value (status and link). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like generate_video or list_models.

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?

It ties the tool explicitly to a prior generate_video call, giving clear when-to-use context. It does not list exclusions or alternatives, but the intended workflow is unambiguous from the description.

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