List recent KaiRouter video jobs

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behaviors: caller scoping, a 50-job limit, and recency ordering. While it does not explicitly state read-only, 'list' inherently implies no mutation, and the given details add useful context.

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 sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence front-loads the core action and scope; the second justifies use cases. Every word earns its place.

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 simple, parameterless list tool, the description covers the essential aspects: what is listed, the limit, ordering, and practical use cases. It does not describe the response fields, but without an output schema, that is a minor gap and does not hinder correct invocation.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly focuses on what the tool does rather than parameters, as none exist. No additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 the specific verb 'List', a clear resource ('video generation jobs'), and a unique scope (caller's recent jobs, up to 50). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_video_models and check_video_status by focusing on jobs, not models or status.

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 explicitly gives use cases: 'recovering a job id that was lost, or reviewing recent generations.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose this tool when needing a job list.

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