summarize_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but offers minimal information. It states what the tool does ('Generate AI summary') but doesn't describe how it works, what kind of summary is produced, whether it requires internet access, processing time, rate limits, or authentication needs. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with just four words, front-loading the core purpose without any wasted language. Every word earns its place by directly contributing to understanding the tool's function.

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 complexity of video summarization and the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what the summary output looks like, format, limitations, or how it differs from other video tools. For a tool with no structured behavioral data, more descriptive context is needed.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting both parameters ('url' as YouTube video URL and 'maxWords' with default). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for adequate schema coverage without extra value from the description.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Generate') and resource ('AI summary of video'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'generate_video_highlights' or 'get_transcript', which might also produce video-related summaries or content.

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. It doesn't mention when this summary generation is preferred over other video analysis tools like 'detect_topics' or 'generate_chapters', nor does it specify any prerequisites or constraints for usage.

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