analyze_ad_video

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, which covers safety. The description adds behavioral context by mentioning that it downloads videos, uses Gemini's capabilities, and employs intelligent caching. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them, offering useful context about how the tool operates.

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 and well-structured, with three sentences that front-load the key purpose and then list specific analysis capabilities and the caching feature. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary fluff.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should explain return values. It lists the types of insights extracted (visual storytelling, audio, etc.) but does not describe the response structure or how the output is presented. This leaves gaps for an agent expecting to use the results.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters beyond implying media_url is the video source. It fails to clarify the purpose of ad_id and brand_name, leaving the agent without guidance on how these optional parameters affect the analysis.

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's primary function: 'analyzing video ads from Facebook' and 'Download and analyze ad videos'. It specifies the verb (analyze), resource (video ads), and source platform (Facebook), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like analyze_ad_image.

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 emphasizes 'REQUIRED for analyzing video ads from Facebook', clearly indicating the primary use case. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as analyze_ad_image or analyze_ad_videos_batch, so it lacks explicit exclusions and alternative guidance.

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