find_related_wwdc_videos

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds useful relation-type context (prerequisites, follow-ups, thematically similar talks) but omits deeper behavior such as ordering, deduplication, or how the source video's year constrains results.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by what it finds and a key use case. No wasted words or buried detail.

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 does well to name the kinds of related content returned and frame the learning-path use case. It leaves minor gaps around result structure and ordering, but those are less critical for a read-only discovery tool with fully documented parameters.

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%, so all six parameters are already documented with examples and defaults. The description mentions no parameters and adds no meaning beyond the schema, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb (Discover), resource (WWDC sessions related to a specific video), and scope (prerequisite, follow-up, thematically similar). The WWDC-video framing clearly distinguishes it from API-focused siblings like get_related_apis and find_similar_apis.

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?

Provides a clear use case ('Essential for creating learning paths') and describes what it finds, but does not state when to prefer this over search_wwdc_content or get_wwdc_video, nor any exclusions. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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