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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: no indication of read-only nature, pagination, ordering (beyond a schema note), authentication, or what the response contains. Two words cannot cover the behavior of a listing endpoint.

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 words are technically concise and front-loaded, but this is under-specification rather than effective brevity. Nothing in the description earns its place because it conveys almost no actionable information.

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 annotations, no output schema, and a description that says nothing about scope, filtering behavior, or return shape, the definition is inadequate for an agent to confidently call a two-parameter listing tool.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema itself, including the region enum and the videoId narrowing semantics. The description adds nothing 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?

"Community videos" is essentially a restatement of the tool name with a qualifier. It never states a verb or what the tool actually does (list/fetch community-submitted videos, presumably across the game), so an agent gets only a vague hint of the resource and no way to distinguish it from videos_mine or videos_editable beyond the word "community."

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 when-to-use guidance. The description does not say when to pick this tool over videos_mine, videos_editable, clans_by_tag_videos, maps_by_slug_videos, or tanks_by_slug_videos, nor does it explain what the required region parameter implies about scope.

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