List bins

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds domain context about what a bin is but says nothing about whether all bins are returned, ordering, or pagination behavior — and with no output schema, the shape of the result is left to inference.

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 short sentences with no filler: the action comes first and the clarifying definition of 'bin' follows immediately. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 trivial, zero-argument read-only list tool, the description covers what is listed and why the resource exists, which resolves the main ambiguity (what a 'bin' is). The one residual gap is that with no output schema, the fields of a returned bin (id, name, etc.) are never described.

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 there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The sentence explaining what a bin is provides conceptual grounding for the returned entities, which is the only parameter-adjacent value available.

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 ('List') and resource ('bins') and grounds the resource in its domain ('user-made collection of videos, like a folder of shortlisted clips'), which separates it from sibling concepts like keywords, tags, and actors. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from nearby siblings such as get_bin_videos or create_bin, so it falls short of a 5.

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 only implied by the verb 'List' — there is no statement of when to call this versus get_bin_videos (contents of one bin) or create_bin. For a zero-parameter, read-only enumeration tool this is survivable, but no explicit alternative or condition is named.

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