direct_list_advideos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly labels the operation as 'READ', disclosing it as non-mutating, and notes that 'API requires Ids', a key constraint. However, it omits other behavioral details such as response format, error handling, or any rate limits, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loaded with 'READ' to immediately convey the operation type. Every word adds value: the API requirement and the usage order are both essential and clearly stated. No 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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description covers the core usage and context. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it fails to mention what the tool returns or any potential limitations (e.g., maximum number of IDs), leaving some informational gaps for the agent.

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 schema has zero description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by naming the parameter ('by ids') and indicating its source ('Use after upload_advideo'), which explains that the IDs are video identifiers obtained from a prior upload. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema definition.

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's function: 'READ: advideos.get by ids' specifies a read operation on ad videos by ID. The addition 'Use after upload_advideo' further distinguishes it from sibling upload tools and clarifies its role in the workflow. The verb+resource+scope combination is specific and unambiguous.

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 clear usage context: 'Use after upload_advideo' tells the agent when to invoke this tool relative to a related operation. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or offer alternative tools for similar tasks, so it lacks full exclusion guidance.

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