start_change_resolution

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

The description reveals that the tool is asynchronous ('Returns immediately with job_id + status') and mentions caching behavior via force_run parameter. However, since no annotations are provided, more details about side effects (e.g., file creation, original file modification) would improve transparency.

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 concise with a front-loaded opening sentence followed by bullet-pointed parameter explanations. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description appropriately summarizes return behavior. It covers all parameters and asynchronous nature. Missing explicit differentiation from siblings and potential prerequisites (e.g., supported video formats) but overall complete for a job-enqueueing tool.

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?

All four parameters are described with meaningful explanations beyond the schema: input_file path with existence requirement, height/width as desired dimensions, and force_run caching override. Schema coverage was 0%, so the description fully compensates.

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 clearly states the tool enqueues a CHANGE_RESOLUTION job that converts video resolution according to provided height and width. It uses specific verb 'Enqueue' and resource 'CHANGE_RESOLUTION job', distinguishing it from siblings like start_change_format.

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 description explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., start_change_format for format conversion). Usage is implied by the purpose but lacks explicit guidance.

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