Check a video

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool targets an in-flight generation job and can yield the finished video, but says nothing about what is returned when the video is still rendering, whether polling is expected, or how long it may take.

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?

A single short sentence with no padding, and the check-then-fetch behavior is front-loaded. It is efficient, though it is arguably too terse for the amount of ambiguity it leaves.

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 status/polling tool with no output schema and no annotations beyond readOnlyHint, the description should explain readiness states, error conditions, and the identity of the video being checked. None of that is present, leaving the agent unable to call it confidently.

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?

With zero declared parameters the baseline would be 4, but the description implies the tool operates on one specific in-progress video ad without any described mechanism for selecting it, which leaves a meaningful semantic gap the schema does not close (additionalProperties is true).

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 verb+resource ('check on a video ad', 'get the finished video'), so the intent is identifiable, but it never says how the target video is identified and does not distinguish itself from siblings like clone_video_ad, list_my_creatives, or approve_video_clone.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus polling alternatives such as list_my_creatives or approve_video_clone, nor any stated precondition (e.g. that a video generation must have been started first). Usage must be inferred entirely from the sentence.

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