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

Annotations already cover safe-read (readOnly, non-destructive) and open-world. The description adds pagination semantics ('one page at a time', pass continuation for next page), which is valuable context beyond the annotations. It stops short of return-shape detail, but with no output schema that's a minor gap.

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?

Two tight sentences: the first front-loads the when-to-use and the second covers the what-it-returns and how to paginate. No filler.

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 2-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger context, and pagination. It could mention result ordering or that continuation is required for subsequent pages, but the essentials are present.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reiterates the continuation-pagination behavior but adds no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 for a fully-covered schema.

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 (list/browse) and resource (a channel's uploads), and explicitly scopes it to the Videos tab beyond 'latest videos'. This clearly distinguishes it from get_channel_latest_videos and search_channel_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?

Gives a concrete use case ('older episodes', 'find a video they remember') and contrasts with latest videos implicitly, but does not name the sibling tools or state when-not-to-use (e.g., exclude search_channel_videos).

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