get_video_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond listing returned components; it does not discuss potential performance implications or scope limitations, so it only moderately extends transparency.

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 consists of two sentences: the first states the purpose and lists contents, the second provides usage guidance. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, earning a perfect score.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description lists the main components (metadata, transcript, chapters, summary, tasks, comments) which is fairly complete for the tool's scope. However, it could mention that the call returns all information in a single response, which is inherent, but the description is already clear. Slight deduction for not explicitly stating that it is a composite call.

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 descriptions for both parameters; the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the tool description contributes no extra parameter insight.

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 returns all available information for a Loom video (metadata, transcript, chapters, summary, tasks, comments) in one call, and distinguishes it from the sibling get_video by specifying that get_video is for metadata only.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool when a complete picture is needed and to use get_video for metadata only. This provides clear context and exclusion, effectively guiding the agent's choice among siblings.

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