find_video_moments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that Gemini performs video/audio/visual reasoning and that 'detail' configures the model. However, it doesn't mention rate limits, required permissions, or potential side effects like caching. The statement about returning 'concise structured JSON' adds some transparency.

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 brief (3 short lines) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the third line about 'compact' feels tacked on. It is efficient but could be better integrated.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description only vaguely mentions returning 'structured JSON'. For a tool with 7 parameters and 17 siblings, more contextual clues about input constraints or output structure would improve completeness. The mention of Gemini's role is helpful.

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%, so description must compensate. It partially explains 'detail' (controls model + tokens + config) and mentions 'compact' default, but ignores parameters like 'url', 'query', 'max_results', 'context_seconds', and 'return_full_text'. Only 1 out of 7 parameters gets meaningful semantic addition.

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 finds moments in a video matching a semantic query, using a specific verb-resource pair. This distinguishes it from video analysis or context tools like 'analyze_video' or 'ask_about_video'.

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 mentions that Gemini does the reasoning and that 'detail' controls model configuration, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus its many siblings (e.g., 'analyze_video', 'ask_about_video'). No alternatives or when-not-to-use advice is given.

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