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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds 'public' scope, which is useful, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, result shape, authentication needs, or how the search is matched. This is a significant gap for a search tool.

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 sentence is short and front-loaded, with no filler. However, the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness, so it does not earn a higher score.

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?

The tool has six optional parameters, no parameter descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations. A one-line description naming the resource and action is far too incomplete for an agent to select parameters or interpret results confidently.

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 description adds no meaning for any of the six parameters: type, limit, query, cursor, company, or updated_since. An agent is left to guess what each parameter controls, which the description should have compensated for.

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 states a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('public LoveTheNorth videos and LTN Snips'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_video, get_transcript, and recent_videos, which are all different operations.

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 the tool is for searching videos rather than retrieving a specific one or listing recent ones. However, it does not explicitly explain when to prefer this over recent_videos or get_video, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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