get_video_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden. It states 'Get status' which implies a read-only operation, but offers no additional details about behavior (e.g., authentication needs, rate limits, or side effects). This is minimally adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the tool's core purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter and no output schema. The description covers the basic purpose but lacks information about possible statuses, response format, or potential errors. It is adequate for a minimal tool but could be more complete.

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 mentions 'specific video id' which aligns with the parameter name 'videoId' but adds no further meaning about format, constraints, or semantics. The parameter name already conveys its purpose.

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 status') and the specific resource ('a specific video id'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'get_image_status' (different resource) and 'list_videos' (different scope).

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 tool is used to retrieve the status of a specific video but provides no guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'list_videos' or 'get_image_status'. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites are mentioned.

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