Align spoken dialogue with a character's mouth movements for a single video shot. Pay per use for per-shot lip-sync in short-drama production.
给单镜做口型同步(对白与人物嘴型对齐)。按用量后付。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| storyboard_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.57Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds the cost trait '按用量后付' (pay per usage) but does not disclose whether the operation is asynchronous, whether it mutates the shot, how results are returned, or whether status polling is needed.
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 short sentences with no filler; the core purpose is front-loaded and the cost note is separate. It is appropriately sized for the minimal schema, though it leaves out behavior that would merit a bit more structure.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter explanation, the description is incomplete. An agent cannot tell what happens after calling this tool, whether it launches a background job, or how to obtain the lip-sync result, despite the added cost note.
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 0%, and the description does not mention storyboard_id at all. It neither explains what the ID refers to, how to obtain it, nor how it relates to the '单镜' being lip-synced. The description adds no semantic value beyond the bare schema.
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 states the specific operation: '给单镜做口型同步' (lip-sync a single shot), with a clarifying parenthetical that it aligns dialogue with character mouth movements. This clearly distinguishes it from the episode-level sibling lipsync_episode.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the status-checking sibling get_lipsync_status. The word '单镜' implies single-shot scope, but the description does not state when to choose this over lipsync_episode or what conditions should be true before calling.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.