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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the curated nature (not a live mirror) and explains what each video returns. There's no contradictory information. Adding details about rate limits or auth needs would improve it, but current disclosure is sufficient.

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 sentences: first states purpose and returns, second lists filters, third gives usage guidance and caveat. Front-loaded, every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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, but the description enumerates return fields (title, description, category, watch URL, embed URL, thumbnail), covering user expectations. Filtering options and caveats are explained. No gaps for intended use.

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% with parameter descriptions already present. The description adds minor context (e.g., query matches title+description) but does not significantly expand beyond the schema. Baseline 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 it lists curated HelloBooks product videos with specific fields (title, description, watch URL, etc.). It mentions filtering by category, featuredOnly, and query. Sibling tools are unrelated (analysis, compliance), so this tool is distinct and its purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when a user asks for a demo, walkthrough or video.' It also notes the curated nature and that the response includes the channel URL for the full catalog. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it, the guidance is clear and helpful.

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