export_segments_vtt

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool 'exports' segments as WebVTT, but does not disclose whether it returns file content, a download URL, or whether all segments are included. Side effects, permissions, and limitations are unaddressed.

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?

One short, well-structured sentence with no filler. The verb, resource, and target format are all front-loaded, making the description easy to scan and process. Every word adds value.

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 single-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable: it names the operation, the resource, and the output format. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it does not explain the return shape or delivery mechanism, and it omits any mention of the closely related export_segments_srt. This leaves a few important gaps for an agent deciding whether the tool is appropriate.

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?

The single parameter, asset_id, is fully described in the schema as 'The asset UUID' with 100% coverage. The description does not add parameter-specific detail, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter completely.

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?

States a specific verb ('Export'), a resource ('asset segments'), and an output format ('WebVTT subtitle format'). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool export_segments_srt by format, and from list_asset_segments by action. The purpose is immediately understandable.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus export_segments_srt, get_subtitle_webvtt, or list_asset_segments. The intended usage must be inferred from the name and format, with no explicit context or exclusion criteria.

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