pl_video_latest

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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, so the description adds value by stating 'Auth: none needed' and showing the return format. However, 'smart-ranked' is never explained, and there is no detail on how tags filter results or pagination behavior beyond the schema.

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 extremely concise: purpose, return shape, example, and auth note all in four short lines. Every sentence earns its place and the structure is scannable.

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 simple read-only list tool, the description provides enough context with return format, example, and auth. It lacks a definition of 'smart-ranked' and does not specify whether multiple videos are always returned, but overall it is sufficient given the schema and annotations.

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?

Input schema covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description's example demonstrates limit usage but does not clarify tags semantics or ranking impact beyond what the schema already states.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('Latest video') and adds 'smart-ranked' to indicate a specific ordering, distinguishing it from siblings like pl_video_popular and pl_news_latest. The verb is implied but the scope is unambiguous.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pl_video_popular or other video tools. It provides an example and auth note but relies on the agent to infer usage from the name and 'latest' keyword.

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