list_uploaded_video_inputs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only says 'list recent images', implying a read operation, but does not disclose any behavioral details such as sorting order, what 'recent' means, or whether there are any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a listing tool.

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 sentence, very concise. It is front-loaded with the verb. While succinct, it could be improved by adding a brief note about the parameter or return value without losing conciseness.

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 low complexity (1 optional param, list operation) and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not mention what the output contains (even though an output schema exists) nor the effect of the limit parameter. An agent would need to inspect the output schema to understand the return structure, but the description should provide at least a hint.

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?

The only parameter is 'limit' with a default value, but the description does not explain its meaning or usage. Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description should compensate, but it does not. The parameter name is self-explanatory to some extent, but no additional context is provided.

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 ('list') and the resource ('recent images uploaded through upload_video_input'), distinguishing from sibling tools that deal with models, estimates, and jobs. However, there is a minor inconsistency: the tool name says 'video_inputs' while the description says 'images', which could cause confusion.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_video_models). The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context without explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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