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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation is read-only ('Retrieve') and scoped to public content, but it does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, whether 'changed' means created or updated, or any response characteristics.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It efficiently packs the action, resource, and filtering condition into one compact clause.

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 list endpoint with three optional parameters, the description is minimally viable: it states the main filter and the resource. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves gaps around pagination, result shape, and exact timestamp semantics that an agent would need for robust 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the meaning of updated_since ('changed after a timestamp'), but it adds nothing about limit or cursor, leaving their roles to be inferred from their names and schema properties alone.

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 names a specific action ('Retrieve'), a resource ('public videos'), and a selection criterion ('changed after a timestamp'). This makes the tool's core purpose clear and distinguishes it from get_transcript and get_video, though it does not explicitly differentiate it from search_videos.

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 implies when to use the tool: when the user wants recently changed public videos. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tool to prefer for other scenarios, such as keyword-based discovery via search_videos.

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