List clips

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that results carry stage and results fields, which is useful, but it doesn't say what 'recent' means (time window, ordering, default page size) or whether results are scoped to an account.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with no filler, but it is a sentence fragment rather than a statement of what the call does, so brevity comes at the cost of a missing verb and missing scope.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description's note about stage and results is welcome, and annotations cover the read-only profile. Still missing for a listing tool: default ordering/window implied by 'recent', default limit, and whether jobs are filtered by account.

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 0% for the single 'limit' parameter (integer, 1-20, optional), and the description never mentions it, its default, or its maximum. An agent gets no help on whether to pass it or how results are bounded.

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 fragment 'Recent clipping jobs with their stage and results' indicates the resource (clip jobs) and roughly what is returned, but has no verb and never says 'list'. It is distinguishable from get_clip only by inference, not by explicit contrast.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternatives (get_clip for a single job, get_clip_usage for quota, create_clip for starting one). The word 'recent' hints at a browse-style call but nothing states the selection condition.

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