render_multi_aspect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the operation is free, uses pure ffmpeg, and runs asynchronously in the background. However, it does not mention how results are returned or tracked, whether it overwrites existing renders, or any side effects.

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 one compact sentence plus two short qualifications. It front-loads the core action and purpose, then adds the free/asynchronous details with no filler.

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 two-parameter async tool, the description covers purpose, cost, and execution model, which is reasonably complete. However, it does not specify what the caller should expect as a return value or how to track the background job, which is a meaningful gap given no output schema is present.

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 50%: 'aspects' already has a description ('目标画幅集') and the enum clarifies allowed values, while 'episode_id' is undocumented. The description adds the '竖/横/方' aspect-ratio context but does not compensate for the missing episode_id semantics.

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 action ('按多个画幅重渲一版' = re-render into multiple aspect ratios) and the target resource (成片/final cut), with a clear purpose (multi-platform distribution). It is not explicitly differentiated from siblings like rerender_episode, but the multi-aspect, multi-platform framing makes the intent reasonably distinct.

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 clear context: use this when you need multiple aspect-ratio versions for multi-platform distribution. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5, but the intended scenario is evident.

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