get_videos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions filtering and pagination but fails to describe critical behaviors like whether this is a read-only operation, what permissions are needed, rate limits, error handling, or the format of returned data. For a tool with 5 parameters and no annotations, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get a list of videos') and adds key features ('with optional filtering and pagination') without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, error conditions, and differentiation from siblings. While the schema covers parameters well, the description doesn't compensate for missing annotations and output schema, leaving the agent with incomplete context.

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?

The description adds minimal value beyond the input schema, which has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions. It mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which aligns with parameters like 'id', 'title', 'language', 'skip', and 'limit', but doesn't provide additional semantic context or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema's thoroughness.

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 states the action ('Get a list of videos') and resource ('videos'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential siblings like 'get_posts' or 'get_talks' beyond the resource type, which prevents a perfect score.

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 mentions 'optional filtering and pagination' which implies some usage context, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_posts' or 'get_talks', nor any prerequisites or exclusions. This leaves significant gaps in usage direction.

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