searchvideolist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The single-word description gives no information about whether this is a read or write operation, what permissions might be required, whether it has rate limits, what format results are returned in, or any other behavioral characteristics.

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?

While technically concise with just one word, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A single word cannot provide the necessary context for tool selection and invocation, making this inefficient communication rather than well-structured brevity.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and dozens of sibling tools, the single-word description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how results are structured, what search capabilities it offers, or how it differs from related tools like 'searchlist' or 'hotvideolist'.

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% schema description coverage, so there are no parameters to document. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there's no need for the description to compensate for undocumented parameters. The description doesn't need to explain parameters that don't exist.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools available. With dozens of sibling tools including other search-related tools like 'searchlist' and 'suggestwords', there's no indication of what distinguishes this particular video search functionality.

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