framedeck_info

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the behavioral burden and does so well by disclosing that it does not download the video and is inexpensive. It could add more about response format or error behavior, but the non-destructive nature is clearly conveyed.

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 sentences, each earning its place: the first states the operation and scope, the second gives the cost and routing rationale. No filler or redundant restatement.

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 single-parameter info tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return fields and a clear use case, which is largely complete. It leaves minor gaps such as exact URL format and explicit alternative mention, 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 schema has zero description coverage and only a string 'url'. The description gives the URL its semantic role — identifying a video whose metadata will be fetched — and previews the returned fields, adding meaning beyond the bare schema.

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?

Starts with a specific verb and object ('Fetch a video's metadata') and lists concrete fields (caption, author, duration). The 'without downloading it' phrasing distinguishes it from a potential extract/download sibling, so an agent can tell it apart from framedeck_extract.

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 gives a clear selection rule: use this as a cheap first call when the caption alone may answer the question. It does not explicitly name the alternative or state when not to use it, but the intended routing is strongly implied.

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