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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered; the description reinforces it with 'Changes nothing.' More valuably, it discloses what the agent gets back — current model advice, capabilities and prices — which matters given there is no output 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?

Three short sentences: what it reads, when to call it, how to scope it. The most important routing signal (call every planning turn) comes early and nothing is repeated.

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?

Absent an output schema, the description does outline the returned content and gives a strong call policy for a one-parameter read tool. Only the shape of the returned guide sections is left implicit, which is minor.

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 0% and the single enum parameter has no per-value documentation, so the description must compensate. 'Pass kind to select that section, or omit it for all kinds' explains both the selection semantics and the default-all behavior that the null default alone leaves ambiguous.

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 (Read) plus the resource (shared video guide) and enumerates its contents: model advice, capabilities, and prices. No sibling tool performs this function, and the description makes that distinguishable without opening the 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?

Gives an explicit call trigger — 'Call it in each turn that plans clips or changes how a clip is made' — which ties usage directly to the clip-planning siblings. It does not name a when-not condition or an alternative, but no close alternative exists among the listed tools.

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