get_movies_by_id_videos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no further behavioral context such as pagination, media types, or response ordering. It essentially restates the GET action without enriching it.

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 short elements: action summary, endpoint, and single parameter explanation. No filler or duplicated schema content. It is front-loaded and scannable.

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?

With one required string parameter, an output schema present, and annotations covering read-only/idempotent behavior, the core call contract is complete. The lack of substitution guidance and video-list specifics is partially mitigated by the endpoint and schema. It is sufficient for a simple GET resource tool.

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%, but the description provides 'id: The id/slug of the resource', adding format semantics beyond the bare string type. It does not explicitly state that the id belongs to a movie, though the endpoint path makes this recoverable. For a single-param tool this is adequate, not rich.

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 the action ('Get') and resource ('all videos'), and the embedded endpoint clarifies that this is scoped to /movies/{id}/videos. This distinguishes it from show-video siblings such as get_shows_by_id_videos. It is clear, though terse.

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 is given about when to call this tool instead of related video endpoints. It does not flag that show or episode video lookups should use get_shows_by_id_videos or the episode video siblings. Usage must be inferred entirely from the endpoint path and tool name.

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