Preview Watched Media Import

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the bar is low; the description still adds meaningful context by disclosing the baseline-vs-fresh-scan comparison and the path-redaction behavior, which is not captured by 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 tight sentences, front-loading the comparison action and immediately following with the safety guarantee. No filler.

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 shape need not be described. Purpose, safety posture, and redaction are all covered; only the relationship to the subsequent actual-import step is left implicit.

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%, so the schema already documents watch_id, include_paths, and known_media_path_hashes. The description's mention of a 'path-redacted' proposal adds light motivation for include_paths but no new syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so it sits at the baseline.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Compare the active watch baseline with a fresh contained scan') plus an explicit statement of the non-effect ('It never imports or changes Premiere'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling manage_media_watch and any real import tool.

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 implies its place in the workflow (preview before committing) and states what it will not do, so an agent knows when to reach for it. It does not, however, explicitly name the follow-up import/apply tool an agent should call afterwards.

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