load_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the key detail that the image becomes a video clip of fixed duration, which is valuable. However, it does not mention side effects, such as whether the clip is stored or how it interacts with other clips, so it provides only partial 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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and the second sentence adds practical use cases. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

For a simple load tool with full schema coverage and an output schema present, the description is complete enough. It covers what the tool does and when to use it. A minor gap is not specifying that the loaded image becomes a clip in the current session, but this is implied by the context.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format examples or relationships, so the baseline score of 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 loads a still image as a video clip with fixed duration, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like load_video and load_audio by focusing on still images.

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 use case context (slideshows, intros, watermark sources, overlays), which helps the agent decide when to use it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but for a simple load operation this is sufficient.

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