list_collections

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds pagination behavior (25 per page, page/total_pages in response) and relationships to other tools. It does not contradict annotations but could detail the metadata fields more.

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 well-structured, front-loaded with the main purpose, then sequentially covers usage order, type-specific guidance, and pagination details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description partially fills the gap by mentioning page and total_pages fields, but does not fully specify the structure of each collection item beyond IDs, counts, and types. Still reasonably complete for a list tool.

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 100% schema coverage baseline at 3, the description adds significant context: explains pagination semantics for page parameter (page 0 = first 25, etc.) and clarifies collection_type values with usage directives (media-descriptions -> describe_video, entities -> extract_video_entities).

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 tool discovers available video collections and their basic metadata, and distinguishes it from siblings by advising to use this first. It explicitly mentions the collection IDs needed for other tools.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance ('Use this first'), links to alternative tools for different collection types (describe_video, extract_video_entities), and explains pagination with the page parameter.

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