create_final_video

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent/openWorld, and the description adds material context beyond them: the operation costs credits (花积分), demands per-call user confirmation, and creates a new canvas node. It stops short of describing reversibility of the resulting node.

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 tight sentences; the cost and confirmation requirement are front-loaded before the canvas side effect. 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description covers cost, confirmation flow, and the canvas side effect—enough for a correct call, though it could clarify the confirm_code round-trip more explicitly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so node/project/task_id/confirm_code are all documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: converting a Seedance 2.5 sample (样片) into a 1080p final video (成片), plus the side effect of creating a 成片生成 node. The purpose is clear, but it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like create_video_node or submit_generation.

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?

Implies the precondition (a successful sample must exist) and discloses that each call requires separate user confirmation, which is a usage constraint. However, it never states when to prefer this over sibling tools such as submit_generation or create_video_node, leaving the selection logic implicit.

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