list_zooms

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. 'List' implies a read-only operation and the field list plus half-open range semantics add real behavioral detail, but permissions, ordering, pagination, and project-locking behavior are not addressed.

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 first two sentences are front-loaded and dense, but the trailing sentence about Recordly export versus MCP ffmpeg export concerns output tooling, not listing zooms, so it reads as context bleed rather than information an agent needs to call this tool.

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 correctly enumerates the returned fields and explains range-selection semantics. It omits return ordering and pagination, but is otherwise sufficient for a 3-parameter listing tool.

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 already 100%, and the description still adds meaning beyond it: the range is 'half-open' and 'selects overlapping regions' rather than requiring containment, and depth is clarified as a discrete level. This is genuine value on top of the schema.

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?

Specific verb+resource (list zooms) plus the exact fields returned (IDs, times, depth, focus). It hints at the editing workflow that siblings update_zoom and delete_zooms serve, but never names them explicitly, so sibling differentiation is only implied.

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?

'Before editing' implies a read-before-write workflow, which is useful context for choosing this over update_zoom/delete_zooms. However there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no stated prerequisites for invoking it.

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