Scaffold a video project

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and not idempotent. The description adds the detail that it runs npm install (~15s) and creates the project at a specific path. However, it does not disclose what happens if the project already exists (e.g., overwrite or error), which is a notable behavioral gap.

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, consisting of two short sentences that convey the essential purpose, location, side effect (npm install), and usage context. No filler or redundant information.

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 absence of an output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns, which is a minor gap. However, the tool's purpose is straightforward (project creation), and the usage context is well-specified. The description works well within the broader toolset, as implied by 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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions for both 'slug' and 'template'. The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate for full schema coverage with no extra parameter information.

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 a new Remotion project at a specific path using a chosen template, and positions it as the first step before adding media or content. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_images or write_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 explicitly says 'Do this once per video, after the user picked a template, before adding images or writing content', providing clear context on when to use it. It also mentions the npm install duration. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for other scenarios.

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