allow_embed_domain

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the tool has no effect unless the embed privacy is set to whiteliist, and it directs the agent to update_video first. That is the kind of operational detail agents need.

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 concise sentences, no filler. The action is front-loaded, and the crucial dependency is stated immediately after. Every sentence contributes.

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 mutation with complete schema descriptions and idempotentHint, the description provides the essential prerequisite and points to the right sibling. It could mention what happens if privacy isn't whitelist, but the current wording conveys that it only takes effect then. Enough for an agent to call it 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 coverage is 100%, so video_id and domain are both fully documented in the input schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond mentioning the domain and video generally, which the schema already covers.

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 states a specific action—'Allow a specific domain to embed a video'—with a clear verb, resource, and object. It also adds the key condition about the whitelist, which distinguishes it from broader embed-related tools like apply_embed_preset.

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 gives a precondition: 'This only takes effect when the video's embed privacy is set to whiteliist' and points to the sibling tool update_video. It does not discuss alternatives for adding multiple domains, but the primary sequencing guidance is clear.

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