Video Search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds important context beyond annotations: it lists the returned result fields (since there is no output schema) and discloses that the tool is in Beta with an access requirement.

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 core description is front-loaded with the purpose and return fields, and the usage guidance follows efficiently. The appended keyword list is somewhat redundant but not large enough to undermine the overall structure.

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 helpfully lists the result fields and notes Beta access. Annotations cover the safety profile, and the schema covers all parameters; the description is nearly complete for correct selection and invocation, though it could clarify how time-filtering parameters interact.

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 seven parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description only says to pass a text `query`, adding no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides; thus the baseline of 3 is 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Find videos on the web by text query') and enumerates the return fields. It also distinguishes the tool from general text web search, making its scope clear against the sibling `search` and related tools.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('find videos, clips, footage, tutorials, or a specific moment within a video') and a when-not-to-use exclusion ('not for general text web search'). However, it does not name a specific alternative sibling tool like `search` or `image_search`, leaving the agent to infer the exact alternative.

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