speech_to_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool creates a task and returns a task id, status, and output URLs, which implies an asynchronous workflow. However, it does not mention side effects, safety, permissions, or the task lifecycle beyond the return values.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core purpose and output.

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 a tool with 17 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely lacking. It does not explain the task-based workflow, polling behavior (wait parameter), callback_url usage, or any prerequisites. The agent would struggle to invoke this correctly without additional context.

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 12%, with only wait and model having descriptions. The tool description does not explain any parameters, including the required source_image_url, source_audio_url, and prompt. It adds minimal value beyond the schema, leaving 88% of parameters underspecified.

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 verb 'Create' and the resource 'Wan task', and explicitly identifies it as 'speech to video'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_to_video and text_to_video, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as image_to_video or text_to_video. No context or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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