analyze_douyin_video

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behavioral traits: it consumes AI compute, has per-project limits for non-subscribers, and takes 35-130 seconds. It implies results are saved to the project, which is a side effect. No contradictions.

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 compact, with three sentences each adding value: purpose, output location, and constraints. No redundant words, and the most important information (what it does) is first.

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?

Given no output schema, the description could specify the format of results, but it states results are saved to the project, which may be sufficient. The constraints and parameters are well-documented. Minor gap about error cases or prerequisites (e.g., need authenticated user?), but overall complete for a focused 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?

The input schema already describes all three parameters (project_id, share_text, analyze_structure) with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, just confirming that share_text is the link and that structure analysis is optional. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool analyzes Douyin videos by extracting oral copywriting and viral structure analysis. It specifies the input (share link) and output (results saved to project), distinguishing it from sibling tools focused on rendering and uploads.

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 for when to use (have a Douyin share link, need analysis) and includes constraints (non-subscription limit, time cost). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives, but no direct sibling exists for this task.

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