skynews_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that only public metadata is returned and explicitly warns that no transcript or article body exists, which sets accurate expectations for a read-only metadata lookup. It could add error-handling details, but for this simple tool the transparency is solid.

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 three short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action, specifies the return fields, and adds a useful negative clarification about transcripts and article bodies without wasting words.

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 one-parameter, low-complexity tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it specifies the input type and the expected metadata fields. It does not describe error behavior or explicitly differentiate itself from skynews_videos, but the core invocation details are present.

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 100%, and the single parameter is already documented as 'Canonical Sky News video URL.' The description repeats this concept without adding format examples, constraints, or additional context, so it provides no real value beyond 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get Sky News video metadata.' It clearly scopes the tool to one video's public metadata from a canonical URL, which distinguishes it from article-focused sibling tools and from the plural skynews_videos tool.

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 clearly establishes when the tool is appropriate: when the agent has a canonical Sky News video URL and needs metadata for that single video. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use them, though the note about there being no transcript or article body provides a useful partial exclusion.

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