vidlens-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but lacks behavioral details. It mentions 'expand' and 'downstream analysis', implying a read-only or processing operation, but doesn't disclose permissions, rate limits, whether it modifies data, or what the output looks like. This is a significant gap for a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and purpose, making it easy to scan and understand quickly without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given the complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter meanings, output format, and usage context. While concise, it doesn't provide enough information for an agent to confidently invoke the tool without guessing.

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%, so the description must compensate but adds no parameter-specific information. It doesn't explain what 'playlistUrlOrId', 'maxVideos', 'includeVideoMeta', or 'dryRun' mean or how they affect the expansion. The baseline is 3 due to the coverage gap, but the description fails to provide meaningful semantic context.

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 verb 'expand' and resource 'playlist' into 'individual videos', specifying the purpose for 'downstream analysis and batch workflows'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'analyzePlaylist' or 'importPlaylist' by focusing on expansion rather than analysis or import, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. While 'downstream analysis and batch workflows' implies a context, there's no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or specific sibling tools to choose instead for different needs.

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