aeroedu_block_add_video

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

Annotations show readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false. The description adds behavioral context: videos appear in order by position, and if position is omitted, it is added at the end. It also lists supported URL formats. This goes beyond annotations, but lacks details on error handling or authorization.

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, no filler. The most critical information is front-loaded: action, resource, and supported URL types. Every part is useful.

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 parameter count (5) and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what the tool does, supported URL formats, and ordering behavior. It does not explain return values or error cases, but for a creation tool, this is acceptable.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that the title parameter can be left empty to auto-fetch from URL, and position can be left empty to append to end. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 (add), resource (video block), and context (to lesson). It specifies support for YouTube, Google Drive, and direct MP4/WebM URLs, and mentions ordering by position. This distinguishes it from sibling block add tools (e.g., pdf, lab).

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 that this tool should be used when adding a video block to a lesson. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. The context of sibling tools (e.g., aeroedu_block_add_pdf) indirectly guides selection, but no strict guidelines are given.

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