Generate a brand-aware video clip

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing key behaviors. It discloses async Job return, credit costs, plan restrictions, and the need to poll until completion. However, it omits details about how 'brand-aware' generation works and potential side effects, leaving minor gaps.

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 and front-loaded: a single purpose sentence followed by dense operational details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to scan.

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 the full lifecycle (start, poll, receive), costs, plan limits, and defaults. Lacks explanation of the 'brand-aware' behavior and exact content of the returned Job, which would be useful given no output schema. Slightly incomplete but not severely.

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 meaningful detail beyond schema: credit costs per tier (40 vs 300), the specific models used, and social-media context for aspect ratios. This enriches the parameter definitions.

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 opening phrase 'Kick off a video generation and return a Job' clearly states the verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from get_job (polling) and generate_image (image generation) by specifying 'video generation' and 'return a Job'.

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?

Provides clear operational context: tier-specific credits and plan requirements, explicit polling instruction with get_job, and aspect ratio defaults for social platforms. It doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like generate_image, but the context strongly implies when to use this tool.

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