reels_search_assets

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

Annotations already establish the read-only, non-destructive, closed-world profile, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value by disclosing the return shape ("compact metadata, variants and readiness") and the important constraint that no geometry is returned, which prevents an agent from expecting renderable assets.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler, and the action leads before the return-value note. Slightly dense semicolon phrasing but nothing that wastes space.

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 five undocumented optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations explaining inputs, the description leaves meaningful gaps an agent must guess at, especially pagination and the `blenderReady` filter. The return-shape sentence partly offsets this, making it adequate but not complete.

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 0% across five parameters, so the schema explains nothing and the description must compensate. It only loosely gestures at the `kind` enum (and misses "image"), and says nothing about `query` matching semantics, `limit`/`offset` pagination, or what `blenderReady` filters on.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Search reusable characters, props, sets and sounds"), making the tool's intent immediately legible. However, it never distinguishes this catalog search from siblings like reels_search_remote_assets or reels_catalog, and its enumeration of kinds omits "image" which the schema allows.

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?

"before creating anything" implies a pre-creation lookup phase, which is useful context but only an implicit when-to-use signal. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over reels_search_remote_assets (remote library) or reels_catalog, despite those being obvious alternatives with overlapping names.

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