get_video_frame

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

The description implies a non-destructive read operation, but with no annotations, it carries the full burden. It doesn't mention side effects, permissions, or what 'compact asset metadata' includes. Minimal transparency, but not misleading.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified. It fails to provide necessary details about parameters or usage, making it adequate but not excellent.

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 lacks parameter explanations, behavioral context, and output semantics. For a tool with 5 parameters and no schema coverage, this is severely incomplete.

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% and the description provides no details about any parameters. The agent must guess the meaning of video_id_or_url, timestamp, reason, force_refresh, and output_format from their names and types alone, which is insufficient.

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 'Extract a local still frame and return compact asset metadata' clearly states the action (extract a still frame) and the output (metadata). It distinguishes from siblings like get_video_clip (extracts a clip, not a frame) and get_video_evidence_asset (likely returns evidence assets).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites or context for the required parameters (video_id_or_url, timestamp) are given, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and parameters.

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