bulk_import_storyboards

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses: deterministic, no AI, free; replace archives and does not reattach generated assets; user-authored prompts are never overwritten; auto_complete writes only empty fields and charges tokens post-paid; frame_visual_contract is ignored; speech rate will raise overflow shots. This goes well beyond what the schema conveys.

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?

Long but highly structured with ★ milestones and explicit field references; every clause carries operational intent. The density is justified by the tool's complexity, though it is heavier than necessary for an initial scan.

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 no output schema, nested payloads, and post-import side effects, it names the key receipt fields (base_prompts_built, speech_duration_raised, speech_duration_overflow, auto_complete.prompt_shots, started) and the required polling/review flow. It covers prerequisites, side effects, cost, and next steps.

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 coverage is only partial, but the description explains mode=merge/replace semantics, dedupe behavior, image_prompt/video_prompt preservation, auto_complete behavior, and the need for a validated payload from check_bulk_import. episode_id remains minimally documented but is self-evident.

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?

States a specific operation — importing a structured JSON payload to create/update an episode's characters, scenes, and storyboards with defined deduplication keys (name / location+time / storyboard_number). This clearly distinguishes it from related tools like check_bulk_import and autofill_storyboards.

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?

Gives an explicit three-step workflow (get_bulk_import_spec → check_bulk_import errors cleared → this tool), mode guidance for merge vs replace with a consent requirement, and auto_complete instructions including when to pass false. Names downstream tools to use after import (get_autofill_status, review_storyboards).

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