omni_generate_video

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that the tool returns a local file path and requires an interview process. Does not mention error handling or permission needs, but overall transparent for a generation tool.

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?

Compact single paragraph with no redundant sentences. Purpose, warning, usage instructions, and output are all present and front-loaded.

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?

Covers main use case ('generate a video') and input options. Does not specify behavior when both `prompt` and `brief` are provided or error handling. Nested object schema is well-explained in description. Output is stated. Lacks edge case details but sufficient for typical use.

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 100%, but description adds context: explains the relationship between `prompt` and `brief`, the interview process, and the importance of not passing a raw one-liner. Enhances schema understanding.

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?

Starts with 'Generate a video with Gemini Omni'—specific verb+resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools (omni_edit_video, omni_status) by focusing on generation. Also mentions returning a local file path, clarifying the outcome.

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?

Explicitly instructs to run the creation interview in GUIDE.md first, then pass either a fully-formed `prompt` or a filled `brief`. Advises against passing a raw one-liner. Implicitly differentiates from edit/status tools via sibling names.

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