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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description still adds real behavioral context: newest-first ordering, the fact that shorts created in the app are included rather than only API-created ones, and the prerequisite that export/rendering (download_url set) gates scheduling. What it omits is pagination mechanics and any signal of result volume.

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, front-loaded with what is listed and returned, then the export prerequisite. The final sentence is dense and packs two ideas (export gating and download_url as the export signal), but nothing is redundant.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming the returned fields and their nullability. The main residual gap is pagination behavior and whether export state is visible per item, which matters given the export-before-schedule rule.

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?

All three parameters (limit, offset, search) are fully documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics — notably it never mentions the search filter or that offset should be fed from next_offset on the previous page.

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 and resource (list the user's shorts) plus ordering (newest first) and the exact fields returned (id, name, video_id, with null semantics for uploaded/generated shorts). That level of detail lets an agent distinguish it from get_short and list_videos without opening a schema.

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?

Implies the workflow clearly: the returned id/name are what feed schedule_short, and the description warns that a short must be exported before scheduling. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g. use get_short for a single short) or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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