generate_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the tool returns a uuid and implies asynchronous job submission, but says nothing about authentication, rate limits, cost, whether the job can be cancelled, or what the polling contract looks like – all material for a generation tool.

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 short sentences with the job-submission action front-loaded, and the return contract stated inline. No wasted words, though the second clause about family is under-specified rather than concise.

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?

For an 8-parameter, asynchronous generation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description omits too much: parameter meanings, model/family relationship, duration and resolution constraints, and polling details are not covered.

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 only 63%. The description adds no semantics for prompt, model, mode, duration, file_urls, resolution, or aspect_ratio; the sentence about family is vague ('documented path') and does not explain the enum values or how family relates to model.

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?

It identifies a submission action for video jobs and names the return value, but the awkward phrase 'family selects the documented path' obscures the primary function and does not differentiate it from the sibling image-generation tools beyond the word '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?

It mentions polling with get_generation, which implies follow-up flow, but there is no guidance on when to use this tool versus generate_image or the other generate_* siblings, nor any stated prerequisites.

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