audio_to_video

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions return values (task id, status, output URLs) but does not disclose that this is an asynchronous task creation that may require polling or cost implications, nor how 'wait' and timeouts behave.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded and to the point, but it contains a minor grammatical error ('a InfiniteTalk') and omits details that would require additional sentences.

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 the tool has 10 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is significantly under-specified. It provides a high-level purpose but lacks guidance on parameter usage, task lifecycle, error handling, or how to retrieve results via sibling tools.

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 20% (only 'model' and 'wait' have descriptions). The description does not explain any parameters beyond the 'audio to video' phrase, which hints at the purpose but not the exact param formats or meanings.

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 creates an InfiniteTalk task on RunAPI for audio-to-video conversion, and specifies return values. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_task and check_pricing.

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 implies usage by naming the operation and resource, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions.

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