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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as ordering, filtering, pagination, or what fields each paragraph contains. The 'context: id' note is unhelpful.

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 short but poorly structured with a redundant 'Guidance:' prefix and a cryptic '| context: id' suffix. The phrase 'List paragraphs' is vague and not front-loaded with the specific scope.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description fails to describe what a paragraph contains or the structure of the returned list. It also omits any details about ordering or pagination, leaving an agent without enough information to anticipate the response.

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% and the id parameter is well described as 'Video item id returned by cms_list_videos.' The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'List body paragraphs for one CMS video item,' which specifies the verb (list), the resource (body paragraphs), and the scope (one video item). This is clear and not a tautology, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling list tools like cms_list_article_paragraphs.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cms_get_video_paragraph or other cms_list_*_paragraphs tools. The cryptic 'context: id' offers no practical usage direction.

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