find_moment_by_topic

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by stating the tool 'searches transcript' and 'returns timestamps with context', aligning with safe, read-only behavior. No contradictions.

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, each earning its place: first states purpose, second gives usage context, third describes output. No redundancy, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Given full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately describes the output as 'timestamps with context' and 'surrounding text'. However, it does not specify the format of timestamps (e.g., seconds) or what 'context' includes, leaving minor gaps.

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 description coverage is 100% for all three parameters, so the schema already documents their meaning. The description adds no additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema; 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 uses a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('moment by topic'), explains the method ('searches transcript'), and describes the output ('timestamps with context', 'multiple matches with surrounding text'). It also provides a usage example ('when do they talk about X?'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'search_in_transcript' or 'get_video_moment'.

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 explicit context for use: 'Use when user asks "when do they talk about X?"'. While it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the clear usage cue is sufficient for most scenarios.

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