List vCDN files

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral context by noting filtering/sorting/pagination, but does not disclose response format, pagination defaults, or any additional constraints. With annotations handling the key safety traits, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the action, resource, and key capabilities without any fluff. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 10 parameters, 60% lacking schema descriptions, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the expected response structure, default pagination behavior, date formats, or which fields are sortable/filterable. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is only 40%, leaving six parameters undocumented. The description mentions filtering, sorting, and pagination at a high level but does not map them to specific fields like page, per_page, sort_order, sort_field_name, start_date, or end_date. The agent would need to infer parameter meaning from names alone, which is insufficient.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('files stored on the Video CDN'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like list_vcdn_resources (which lists resources) and get_vcdn_files_total (which likely returns a count). The mention of filtering, sorting, and pagination further clarifies the tool's scope.

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 implies the primary use case: to retrieve files from the Video CDN with the ability to filter, sort, and paginate. While it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, the context is clear enough for an agent to choose this over sibling tools like list_vcdn_resources or get_vcdn_files_total.

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