Video Metadata MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does ('批量更新多个视频文件的元数据') without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention whether this is a destructive operation, what permissions are required, how errors are handled, what happens to existing metadata not mentioned in updates, or any rate limits. For a batch mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence with zero waste. Every word earns its place - '批量' specifies batch operation, '更新' is the action, '多个视频文件' identifies the resource scope, and '元数据' specifies what's being updated. No redundant information.

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 batch mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address critical context like: what permissions are needed, whether updates are partial or complete replacements, how errors are handled in batch operations, what the return value looks like, or any limitations. The description alone is insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 the schema already fully documents both parameters (filePaths and updates). The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides - it doesn't explain parameter relationships, constraints, or usage patterns. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 clearly states the action ('批量更新' - batch update) and resource ('多个视频文件的元数据' - multiple video files' metadata). It distinguishes from siblings like 'update_video_metadata' (singular) by specifying batch operation, but doesn't fully differentiate from 'batch_add_tags' or 'batch_remove_tags' which are also batch operations on video metadata.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_video_metadata' (for single files) or 'batch_add_tags'/'batch_remove_tags' (for specific metadata operations). The description implies batch context but doesn't provide explicit when/when-not instructions or mention prerequisites.

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