Get Pexels Video

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description redundantly says 'Read-only.' However, it adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: that the response includes every available rendition and the complete video_files list, not just a truncated subset. This is useful and not inferable from annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and differentiator, and no wasted words. The read-only mention is redundant but short. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 single-parameter get operation with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return behavior (full detail, complete video_files list), the key differentiator from siblings, and the read-only nature. Nothing critical is missing given the low complexity.

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% with the id parameter fully described as 'The numeric Pexels video ID.' The description reinforces this as 'numeric ID' but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 applies for high schema coverage.

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 it gets a single Pexels video by numeric ID, and explicitly contrasts with search/popular tools by noting it returns the complete video_files list. This distinguishes it from siblings and clearly specifies the resource and scope.

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?

It indicates when to use this tool by contrasting with search/popular tools ('unlike the search/popular tools... returns the complete list'), implying use when a specific video ID is known and full detail is needed. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name sibling alternatives directly, but the differentiation is clear.

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