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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds only that the server marks it read-only so it runs immediately, which is useful workflow context but largely repeats the annotations. It does not disclose pagination behavior, response shape, or rate limits.

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 front-loaded with the core action and purpose, then gives a specific filter example. The final sentence about Royally is somewhat redundant with annotations and awkwardly phrased, but it is not verbose overall.

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 five-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and the key video filter but omits pagination semantics and any indication of return shape. It is adequate but not complete enough to call without consulting the schema for paging behavior.

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 60%, so the schema already documents type, search, and site_id in detail. The description reinforces the video filter for Elementor widgets but does not explain page, per_page, or pagination behavior, leaving gaps that the description should help fill at this coverage level.

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 a specific verb and resource: listing uploaded images and SVG assets from the WordPress Media Library. It adds Elementor-specific purpose, referencing attachment IDs when composing pages and using type 'video' for specific widgets. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the many other media-listing siblings, but the Elementor context makes the purpose clear.

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?

It gives clear usage context: use when composing pages and needing attachment IDs, and use type 'video' to discover uploaded videos for e-self-hosted-video/e-background-video. It does not mention when not to use it or name alternative sibling tools, but the positive guidance is strong.

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