VeoMCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes what the tool does (lists models with capabilities and image rules) and hints at the output format ('Table of all models'), but lacks details on potential rate limits, authentication needs, or error handling. However, it adds useful context about model features and comparisons.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance, model comparisons, and return details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to understand.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no annotations, but has an output schema), the description is complete. It explains the purpose, usage, model details, and output format, which is sufficient for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly without needing to rely heavily on structured fields.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description compensates by providing additional context about model capabilities and comparisons, which adds value beyond the schema. This justifies a score above the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 explicitly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'all available Veo models and their capabilities', making the purpose specific and clear. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like veo_image_to_video or veo_text_to_video by focusing on model listing rather than video generation or task management.

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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use this to understand which model to choose for your video generation.' It implies alternatives by referencing model-specific actions, helping users decide between this tool and others like veo_image_to_video based on their needs.

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