Fetch one page of metadata cards for an NDTV video category. Choose category from ndtv_video_categories and request sequential pages until items is empty; NDTV exposes no total count. No media bytes are returned.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| category | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover safety (readOnlyHint) and world scope (openWorldHint). The description adds genuinely new behavior: there is no total count so pagination must be driven by an empty result, and no media bytes are returned — both important for planning calls and interpreting output.
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 tight sentences, each earning its place: what it returns, how to drive pagination, and what it excludes. Purpose is front-loaded and no sentence is filler.
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 an output schema present, return-value detail is not required, and the description adds useful framing ('metadata cards', no media bytes). Only the pagination parameter convention is left unspecified, which is a minor gap for a 2-parameter reader.
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 0%, so the description must carry the burden. It clarifies where 'category' comes from (ndtv_video_categories) and that 'page' is sequential, but gives no indexing convention (0- vs 1-based) or page size, leaving the two parameters only partially specified.
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+resource+scope: 'Fetch one page of metadata cards for an NDTV video category.' An agent can distinguish it from ndtv_video (single video) and ndtv_latest_videos, though the description never names those siblings explicitly, so differentiation is implicit rather than stated.
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?
Gives explicit operating instructions: source the category from ndtv_video_categories, then request sequential pages until 'items' is empty. This is a full when/how-to-use protocol including the terminating condition, exceeding typical guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
