get_collect_videos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read of a collection's contents but says nothing about pagination, default/maximum result behavior, auth requirements, or what happens with an invalid collects_id.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though its brevity is also what leaves the sibling-ambiguity and behavioral gaps unaddressed.

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?

For a simple two-parameter list tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. The main omission is disambiguation from the near-identically named sibling list_collection_videos, which an agent needs to route correctly.

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 both parameters (limit, collects_id) are already documented in the schema; the description only restates collects_id as the key. Baseline 3 applies since it adds no syntax, format, or edge-case detail beyond the structured fields.

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 gives a specific verb ('List') and resource ('videos inside a specific Douyin collection folder') and names the keying field (collects_id). It is clear on its own, but it does not distinguish itself from the very similar sibling 'list_collection_videos', leaving the agent to guess which one applies when.

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?

Usage is only implied: it lists videos scoped to a collection, and the schema note 'from list_collects' hints at a prerequisite. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or naming of alternative tools such as list_collection_videos or list_collects.

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