export_segments_srt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the export action and SRT format; it does not say whether the operation is read-only, whether existing segments/subtitles must be present, or whether the result is returned directly or as a file.

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 concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately short for a one-parameter tool, though it could slightly expand on behavior without becoming wordy.

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?

With only one documented UUID parameter and no nested fields or output schema, the description plus schema is largely usable. However, it does not explain what an 'asset segment' is or how the SRT result is returned, leaving minor but real ambiguity for an agent.

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 input schema covers the single asset_id parameter at 100%, and the schema already documents it as 'The asset UUID'. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema 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 verb ('Export'), a resource ('asset segments'), and the output format ('SRT subtitle format'), which is enough to distinguish it from the sibling export_segments_vtt. An agent can immediately identify what the tool produces without needing the schema.

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 format label implies use when SRT subtitle output is needed, but the description does not explicitly say when to choose this over export_segments_vtt or get_segments_text, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Guidance is therefore implied rather than explicit.

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