analyze_ad_video

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

Discloses meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: downloads and analyzes video via Gemini, uses caching per ad rather than CDN URL, and mentions intelligent caching. This aligns with readOnlyHint while adding practical details.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with 'REQUIRED', followed by function, analysis details, and caching guidance. No redundant phrases or 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?

Given no output schema and minimal param descriptions, the description covers purpose, cached behavior, and analysis dimensions well. Missing brand_name semantics and explicit return format, but the extracted-elements list implies output structure.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds meaning for media_url (required video URL) and ad_id (caching key), but brand_name is entirely unexplained. This leaves one parameter without semantic clarity.

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 function: 'analyzing video ads from LinkedIn' with specific outputs (hook, storytelling, on-screen text, voiceover, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_ad_image by explicitly focusing on video.

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 gives a strong usage signal with 'REQUIRED for analyzing video ads' and advises passing ad_id for correct caching. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools but the sibling context makes the differentiation obvious.

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