Write content.json (storyboard)

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies the required structure, constraints on Vietnamese text, and factual accuracy. The idempotentHint true is consistent; no contradictions. It could mention that it will overwrite existing content.json but is idempotent per annotations.

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 fairly long but well-structured: purpose first, then schema breakdown, then special rules. Every sentence adds value, but it could be slightly more concise by grouping rules more tightly.

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 only 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the input format extensively, including edge cases (Vietnamese ALL-CAPS). It lacks some details like whether partial writes are allowed, but likely sufficient for an agent with idempotentHint.

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 parameter 'slug' has no description in schema, but the description compensates by clearly explaining its usage in the path. 'content_json' is fully detailed in the description with schema, internationalization rules, and accuracy requirements, far exceeding the minimal schema 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 verb 'Write' and the resource 'the video storyboard to <project>/content.json'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'preview_images' or 'generate_voiceover' by specifying its exact output file and format.

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 implicitly tells when to use this tool (to write the storyboard) through its clear purpose. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or describe alternatives, which would be helpful given the sibling list.

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