vast42_list_media_files

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

No annotations are provided, and the description offers no behavioral context beyond the act of listing. It does not disclose pagination behavior (despite limit/offset parameters), response format, whether the list is flat or hierarchical, or any side effects. The description carries no transparency value beyond the bare operation.

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 filler words. It is appropriately brief for a simple list operation, though the extreme brevity leaves some gaps in other dimensions.

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?

Given the tool is part of a large family of similar list tools (vast42_list_ads, vast42_list_creatives, vast_list_media, etc.), the description is too minimal. It does not clarify what 'media files' encompasses (e.g., linear vs. non-linear, associated entities) or mention the two pagination parameters. The output schema is absent, so more descriptive context would be expected for a list operation.

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?

The input schema provides complete descriptions for both parameters (limit and offset) with 100% coverage. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 'List all VAST 4.2 media files' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('VAST 4.2 media files'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like vast_list_media or vast42_list_linears. It accurately captures the tool's core function without ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as vast42_get_media_file, vast42_list_linears, or vast_list_media. It does not mention scenarios, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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