schedule_video

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

With no annotations provided, the description takes on the full transparency burden. It discloses quota cost, timezone behavior for publish_at, and the side effect of keeping the video private until the scheduled time. This is strong behavioral context, though it does not cover every possible edge case.

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 tight sentences with the main purpose front-loaded. The remaining details—quota cost, timestamp format, and side effect—are all high-value and each earns its place. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential invocation details: what the tool does, timestamp format, quota cost, and visibility side effect. Minor omissions like requiring a future publish_at date or describing the return value do not critically impair correct usage.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds concrete semantics for publish_at by specifying ISO 8601 format, UTC interpretation, and an example. The video_id parameter is not explicitly detailed, but the phrase 'existing private video' clarifies that it refers to an already-uploaded video.

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 operation: scheduling an existing private video to go public at a given time. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like upload_video and update_video. The scope is precise and leaves no ambiguity about the resource being acted on.

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 implies the correct usage context: use this for already-existing private videos that need to be published on a schedule. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is clear enough to route an agent to the right tool.

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