Get VideoSpec example

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the context that this is a 'starter' example rather than a full template, which is useful but minimal. No other behavioral traits (like return format or error behavior) are disclosed, but the simplicity of the tool lowers the bar.

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 a single, short sentence that immediately states the action and target. Every word is necessary, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool is simple (one enum parameter, read-only, no output schema), so the brief description is adequate for basic invocation. However, it does not explain what the returned example contains or how it should be interpreted, which might be needed for a tool returning a spec example. Overall, it meets the minimum viable threshold but lacks some helpful context.

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 sole parameter templateId is fully defined by the schema's enum list and required field. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Since schema coverage is effectively complete via the enum, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action ('Return') and the resource ('starter example for one template'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_template (which returns template details) and list_templates (which lists all templates). The scope 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 gives a literal purpose but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_template or scaffold_video_spec. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, so an agent is left without contextual decision support.

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