watch_and_analyze

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses downloading the video, using Gemini AI, and returning structured JSON. It also details async behavior for some platforms. However, missing potential caveats like bandwidth/download size, processing time, or rate limits prevent a 5.

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?

Five sentences in two paragraphs, front-loaded with purpose, then behavior, platform differences, polling, and sibling contrast. Every sentence is informative with no wasted words.

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 complexity (multiple platforms, async/polling, output schema exists, sibling tools), the description covers all essential aspects: functionality, platform-specific behaviors, polling method, and relationship to execute_tutorial_steps. Schema and output schema handle remaining details.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds useful context: url supports YouTube, TikTok, Instagram; lang is a hint; model defaults to gemini-2.5-flash (though schema default says gemini-flash-latest, causing slight inconsistency). Overall adds value beyond schema.

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 watches a video tutorial and extracts technical steps, commands, and code. It distinguishes itself from siblings by noting it does not execute steps, directly referencing 'execute_tutorial_steps' as the alternative.

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 specifies when to use this tool for analysis versus execute_tutorial_steps for execution. It also provides platform-specific guidance (YouTube immediate, TikTok/Instagram need polling via check_analysis_job), giving clear usage context.

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