List unindexed videos

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is already covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the default cap of 50, the reason for it (a new folder can leave thousands pending), and the totalCount/offset walk pattern. It does not describe entry shape or ordering, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the definition of what gets listed, then the next action, then the pagination caveat. No sentence is redundant with the schema or the title.

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 two-parameter, zero-required read tool with no output schema, the description covers identification, follow-up action, and pagination behavior. It even names totalCount, which is otherwise undiscoverable since no output schema exists.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds value by tying the parameters to a workflow: the 50 default is explained as a backlog-size protection, and offset is framed as the mechanism for walking a long queue, which is more than the schema's bare 'skip this many entries'.

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) plus the exact filter criterion that defines membership: entries with no scene thumbnails or no known length. This is distinguishable from siblings like search_videos, get_video, or catalog_stats without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent onward ('Pass each id to index_video to work through them'), which is the key when-to-use relationship in this toolset. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use or a named contrasting sibling (e.g. search_videos for already-indexed content), so it stops short of a 5.

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