start_trim

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

Describes asynchronous enqueue behavior and force_run's cache-ignoring effect. No annotations exist. Missing details on failure modes, resource consumption, or whether trimming modifies original 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?

Two sentences: first states purpose and return, second lists parameters with inline clarifications. No redundant words, front-loaded with core action.

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?

Covers all parameters, mentions return format, and assumes output schema handles details. Lacks mention of possible side effects or file size considerations, but sufficient for a simple trim 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?

Schema has 0% description coverage; description adds critical context: input_file must exist, times are floats in seconds, duration defined, force_run for cache bypass. Fully compensates schema gap.

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?

Description clearly states 'Enqueue a TRIM job' with immediate return of job_id+status. It specifies the verb (enqueue/trim) and resource (video file), and differentiates from siblings like start_audio_extraction.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The parameter listing implies trimming video files, but alternatives like start_change_format are not contrasted. Lacks usage context.

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