generate_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the default async behavior (returns videoId), the blocking option, and auto-download. However, it omits potential side effects, authentication, rate limits, or failure handling.

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?

Three concise sentences, each adding value. Front-loaded with the primary action, then options. No redundant information.

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 11 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers key workflow but leaves many parameters unexplained, forcing the agent to guess or rely on external knowledge.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It only explains wait and outputDir, leaving 9 parameters (prompt, mode, seed, image, width, height, frame_rate, num_frames, negative_prompt) undocumented. This is insufficient for an agent to use the tool effectively.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: submitting a video generation task. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning videoId polling (related to get_video) and implies difference from generate_image.

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 explicit guidance on using wait=false (default) for polling vs wait=true for blocking, and mentions outputDir for auto-download. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios but offers clear context.

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