List product videos

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the main scope, optional filters, and that the plan limit is included in the result. Still, it does not clarify whether the operation is read-only, how results are ordered or paginated, or what 'plan limit' means in the response.

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?

One tightly written sentence conveys scope, optional filtering, and return content without repetition or unnecessary detail. The information is efficiently front-loaded and every phrase 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?

For a simple two-parameter list tool, the description covers the core purpose and optional parameters. But with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves some important context implicit, such as the structure of the returned video list, the exact meaning of 'plan limit', and whether the filters are mutually exclusive or combinable.

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. It does add meaning by explaining that product and shop are optional filters, which maps to product_id and shop_id. However, it does not elaborate on value formats, whether the filters can be combined, or the exact behavior when no filters are supplied.

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 title supplies the verb 'List' and the description names the resource ('product videos') plus the scope ('of the partner') and optional filters (product/shop). It is clear enough to distinguish from media_upload_video, media_update, and media_delete, though the description itself is phrased as a noun fragment rather than a full imperative.

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 implies when to use the tool: to retrieve product videos, with optional filtering by product or shop. However, it gives no explicit guidance about alternatives, exclusions, or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer the usage context.

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