text_to_video

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions asynchronous behavior (returns task id) but omits details about polling, failure modes, or rate limits. The schema includes polling parameters (wait, timeout, interval) yet the description does not address them.

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 short sentence, but it sacrifices critical information. For a tool with many parameters and no output schema, more detail is needed.

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?

With no output schema and 13 parameters, the description fails to provide sufficient context. Key aspects (how to supply text, what output structure is) are missing, making the tool difficult to invoke correctly.

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 15%; the description adds no parameter explanations. With 13 parameters (0 required), the agent receives no help understanding what fields like duration_seconds or source_image_urls mean.

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 states 'text to video' but the input schema contains no field for text or prompt, making the purpose ambiguous and potentially misleading. The core input is missing from the schema, contradicting the described function.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (check_pricing, get_task). The description does not clarify prerequisites or context for invocation.

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