list_broll

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the storage path structure, the full set of returned attributes, and the fact that the user sees the same clips in the app's B-roll tab. No pagination or ordering behavior is disclosed.

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?

Roughly three tight sentences, front-loaded with what it lists, then the return fields, then usage. The trailing app-tab sentence is slightly peripheral but still helps the agent understand the user's mental model.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description enumerates the returned fields (title, folder, filmed, orientation, duration, description, keywords, path), which compensates. For a read-only list tool with annotations carrying the safety profile, nothing critical is missing.

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%, so query/folder/orientation are already fully documented in the schema, including the enum values. The description reinforces the content of folders and the filmed YYYY-MM field but adds no new parameter syntax or semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the user's own b-roll') and pins the scope to _library/broll/<folder>/ with concrete examples of content. It distinguishes 'the user's own' clips from generic media, though it never names the sibling it is not (e.g. search_media, phone_videos).

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use: 'Use it for B-ROLL shots in a storyboard or an edit before asking the user to film new b-roll.' This frames the decision point well, but offers no explicit when-not or named alternative for discovering non-owned media.

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