app_event_video_clips_get_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it delivers almost nothing. The only behavioral signal is the implicit read-only nature of the 'GET' verb; nothing is said about auth scope, whether the clip must exist, or what happens on a missing id.

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?

Very short, but the length is achieved by omitting meaning rather than by being economical. The route string is duplicated verbatim inside the parentheses, which is pure waste with zero informational value.

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 4-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, an agent needs to know what an app event video clip is, what the include/fields options affect, and what the response looks like. The description supplies none of this, leaving the agent to infer everything from the schema and route alone.

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 the schema itself documents the id, include, and fields_* parameters adequately; the description adds no additional meaning. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting and the description neither helps nor harms.

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 is essentially the raw HTTP route 'GET /v1/appEventVideoClips/{id}' repeated twice. It does imply a verb (read) and a resource (app event video clips) but is a restatement of the endpoint rather than an explanation of what the tool retrieves, and it does nothing to distinguish it from the many sibling *_get_instance 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?

No indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g. app_event_video_clips_update_instance, app_event_video_clips_delete_instance, or the app_event_localizations_app_event_video_clips_get_to_many_related sibling that also returns video clips). No prerequisites or context are given.

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