video_capture_status

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe, non-mutating read. The description adds only the semantic subject of the check (capture in progress), with no detail on return shape, latency, or whether it reflects a queued vs. active capture. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is acceptable but thin.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word carries meaning and the purpose is stated immediately.

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 parameterless, read-only status probe with no output schema, the description is sufficient to call the tool correctly. The only mild gap is that it never states the return form (boolean vs. state string), though 'whether' strongly implies a boolean.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline this lands at 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, and there is nothing further for it to document.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check whether a video capture is in progress'), so an agent knows exactly what this tool answers. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the video_capture_start / video_capture_stop siblings, but the noun phrase makes the distinction obvious enough.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose — you call it to determine capture state, presumably before starting or stopping capture. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no mention of the start/stop siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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