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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Read-only' merely restates it. Beyond that it adds only the HTTP endpoint ('GET /live-streams'), disclosing nothing about pagination behavior, default result sets, or account-scoping rules that the annotations don't already cover.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, no padding or filler. The only waste is the redundant 'Read-only' clause, which duplicates the annotation.

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 six optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations describing return shape, the description leaves the result structure and pagination semantics (pageSize default 25, currentPage 1-based) entirely to the schema. Adequate to invoke the tool, but thin for a tool whose only job is returning a paged collection.

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%, so every parameter is already documented in the schema. The description names two filters (streamKey, name) and mentions sorting, which mirrors rather than extends the schema — the correct baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb and resource ('List live streams in the account') with the added scope of optional filters and sorting, which separates it from the singular apivideo_get_live_stream. It does not name any sibling outright, but the list-vs-get distinction is inferable from the plural resource.

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 implied by the plural/list framing — this is the browse-and-filter operation versus get_live_stream for a single item — but the description never states when to prefer this over siblings or what prerequisites exist. No exclusions or alternatives are given, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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