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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it reveals nothing about whether this is a read or write operation, what permissions are needed, what gets changed, or what the response contains.

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 extremely short, but it is not concise in a useful way—it is under-specified and fails to communicate the tool's purpose. The phrase 'A suggestion, as its form' is not front-loaded with 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?

The tool has three parameters and no output schema or annotations, yet the description provides no context about its operation, return values, or relationship to sibling tools. It is completely inadequate for an agent to invoke 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 100%, and the schema already documents id, token, and region, including the enum for region. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 'A suggestion, as its form' is cryptic and does not state what the tool does. It fails to provide a specific verb or resource, and gives no indication that this relates to videos or editing, despite the name videos_editable.

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, when not to use it, or which sibling tools are alternatives. The description offers no context that would help an agent choose it over videos or videos_mine.

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