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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: result ordering ('newest first'), the payload fields (status, video, prompt) and that paging is cursor-based, which tells the agent how to iterate.

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?

A single front-loaded fragment naming the resource, ordering, fields and paging — no filler. It is telegraphic to the point of leaving gaps, but nothing stated is wasted.

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 does the right thing by sketching the returned fields and ordering. It still leaves open what 'limit' does and whether nextCursor is a field on the response or the input cursor, both of which an agent needs to page correctly.

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 both parameters arrive undocumented. The description only gestures at paging ('Page with nextCursor') and never explains 'limit' (default, max, range), and it names the token 'nextCursor' while the actual parameter is 'cursor', which can mislead on how to continue.

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 resource ('Your video analyses') with scope ('Your'), ordering ('newest first'), and the fields returned. This clearly separates it from get_analysis and from the other list_* siblings such as list_videos or list_jobs, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'Your' indicates a personal listing and the ordering hints at a recent-activity view, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or pointer to get_analysis for a single item. An agent can infer the case but isn't guided.

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