list_videos

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description's job is lighter. It adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: newest-first default ordering and the specific trimmed fields returned (id, name, duration, privacy, play count, folder, status).

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler. The core action and default behavior are front-loaded, the return shape is summarized compactly, and the alternative tool is mentioned in the final sentence. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description compensates by naming the returned fields and default sort order. Pagination is not described in prose, but the schema already documents page and per_page, so the description is adequately complete for invocation.

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% and all five parameters already have clear descriptions, including defaults, enums, and bounds. The description adds general context like default ordering but does not need to restate parameter details; the baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb-resource pairing: 'List videos in your Vimeo library,' states default ordering, and distinguishes itself from get_video by noting the trimmed shape. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like get_video and search_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?

The description explicitly directs the agent to get_video when the full object for one video is needed, which is strong guidance. It doesn't explicitly mention search_videos as an alternative for search-like queries, but the phrase 'in your Vimeo library' conveys the intended scope well enough.

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