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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. Beyond that the description adds two non-obvious traits: the result set is restricted to finished clips only, and fetching each download_url requires the same Bearer key — an auth constraint an agent would otherwise only discover at call time.

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 short sentences with no filler; the response-shape fact comes before the auth caveat. It loses a point only because the opening sentence is a verbless fragment rather than a properly front-loaded statement of the action.

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 output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and flagging the per-clip auth requirement. It is close to sufficient for a 2-parameter read tool, though it stays silent on pagination/result limits and on behavior when no clips have finished.

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%, with both job_id and include_subtitles documented in the schema itself, so the baseline is 3. The description's field list describes the response payload rather than adding meaning to either parameter.

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 is a noun phrase ('Only the finished clips of a job') that names the resource and scope, and the enumerated fields (id, title, duration, download_url) make the payload concrete. However it lacks an explicit verb and does no work to separate itself from siblings like get_job or create_clips.

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 statement of when to call this versus get_job or create_clips, and no conditions or prerequisites. 'Only the finished clips' hints at a filter but never says what to do when clips are still processing or which tool covers the unfinished case.

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