text_to_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions returning task id, status, and output URLs but does not disclose that the tool is asynchronous, requires polling (hinted by 'wait' parameter), or any authentication or rate limit info.

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?

Description is two sentences and to the point. However, it could be more structured to front-load key behavioral details.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and multiple siblings, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the return format beyond basic fields or the async nature, nor how to handle polling.

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 only 29%, with only 'model' and 'wait' having descriptions. The description adds no parameter explanations, leaving the semantics of aspect_ratio, output_resolution, reference_image_urls, timeout, poll_interval undefined.

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 it creates a HappyHorse task on RunAPI for text-to-video, with return values. It distinguishes from siblings like image_to_video by explicitly mentioning 'text to 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like image_to_video or get_task. No usage context or exclusions are given.

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