List Video Ads channels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the bracketed [READ] adds nothing. The description contributes only the host/path/version, which is technical routing detail rather than behavioral context (no pagination, no auth requirements, no scope caveats).

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?

A single compact line with no filler and the read/API context front-loaded. It is appropriately sized, though it is so terse that brevity shades into under-specification rather than pure efficiency.

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 zero-param read tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the minimum is met, but nothing explains what a 'channel' represents in VADS or how it relates to VADS campaigns/domains. Adequate for invocation, thin for selection.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter guidance is needed or missing.

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 exposes the underlying API route (GET /channels under VADS 2.0) which implies listing channels, but it never states the purpose in prose — it relies on the title. It does not differentiate this VADS listing from sibling listings such as list_vod_channels, list_live_streams, or list_vads_channel_campaigns.

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 use this tool versus the many other list_* siblings, nor any preconditions. The only implicit signal is the VADS product scope and the [READ] marker, which the agent must infer as usage guidance on its own.

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