set_mv_lyrics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds some useful context: the operation is free and excludes full-track audio. However, it does not disclose overwrite semantics, whether existing lyrics are replaced, required authorization, or failure/return behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose ('MV project: set lyrics'). Every clause earns its place: the audio caveat, the cost note, and the pipeline order are all useful without any 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 simple two-parameter setter with no output schema, the description gives enough to call it correctly: the required fields are obvious from the schema, and the pipeline order and audio boundary are stated. Minor missing details like overwrite behavior are not critical for such a low-complexity tool.

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 50% because drama_id lacks a description. The description reinforces that lyrics is the lyric text and that audio is handled elsewhere, but it does not clarify that drama_id identifies the MV project/drama. It partially compensates but leaves a real gap.

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 a specific verb and resource: setting lyrics for an MV project. It also distinguishes this tool from downstream generation siblings by explicitly naming the follow-on sequence generate_mv_story → generate_mv_script, so an agent can identify it as the lyric-input step.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use context: after this tool, run generate_mv_story then generate_mv_script. It also states a when-not boundary: the full-song audio is uploaded separately when creating the drama, so this tool should not be used for audio upload.

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