stellaris_video_search

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the meaningful behavior: the return payload is spoken transcript content with a deep link to that exact moment (e.g. &t=6393s), which is valuable since there is no output schema. It omits relevance/ordering behavior, corpus scope (which videos are indexed), and what happens when no transcript matches.

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 tight sentences with the core action and return format front-loaded, zero redundant restatement of the schema. The closing rationale ('wiki page is too dry') is colorful but slightly soft compared to a precise usage rule.

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 search tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what the agent most needs: what is searched, what comes back, and the format of the returned deep link. Remaining gaps are modest: no statement of corpus scope, result ordering, or fallback behavior on zero hits.

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%, with both the query examples and the limit default documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing about how query phrasing affects matching (natural language vs keywords) or how limit interacts with result ranking.

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 and resource: search Stellaris video transcripts in the KB, and clarifies it returns spoken content plus a timestamped deep link. The 'video transcripts' scoping implicitly separates it from text-search siblings, but no sibling is named, so an agent must infer the division of labor against stellaris_search and stellaris_video_chapters.

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?

Gives clear selection context: use when a player would rather watch an explanation, or when the corresponding wiki page is too dry. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating when NOT to use it (e.g. when a specific chapter listing is wanted, use stellaris_video_chapters), so routing is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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