create_video

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

No annotations provided, so description carries the burden. It discloses smart async behavior (long videos return handle, short block) and mentions free models. It does not cover rate limits or auth needs, but provides useful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 paragraph, dense with information including multilingual triggers. It is efficient but could be better structured with bullet points for clarity. No waste, but front-loading could be improved.

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?

No output schema exists. The description mentions a handle for long videos but does not describe the return structure for short videos or error handling. Given the complexity (18 params, no output schema), the description is 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 56%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context for `mode` and `wait` parameters but does not explain all 18 parameters. It adds value for key ones but is not comprehensive.

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 creates AI videos in three modes (text-to-video, image-to-video, keyframe animation) and distinguishes it from siblings like `get_video` and `generate_image`. The verb 'Create' and resource 'AI video' are specific.

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 says 'Use this for any 生成视频/做动画 request; no local video tools needed.' It implies use instead of local tools and contrasts with `get_video` for polling. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear.

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