VidLens

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

The description valuably discloses performance characteristics '[~5-20s, scales with playlist size]' and the 'partial success' handling model for batch operations. However, lacking annotations, it fails to clarify whether this creates persistent collections, requires specific permissions, or is idempotent.

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 single-sentence structure is front-loaded and free of fluff. The bracketed timing notation is information-dense. However, extreme brevity is inappropriate given the tool's complexity and complete absence of structured documentation.

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 6-parameter analytical tool with zero schema descriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, the 20-word description is inadequate. It omits what 'partial success' returns (error objects vs. skipped items), what aggregate benchmarks contain, and how the enum values in 'analyses' differ.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage across 6 parameters, the description fails to compensate. While 'aggregate benchmarks' loosely implies the 'analyses' parameter's purpose, critical parameters like 'dryRun', 'transcriptMode', and 'commentsSampleSize' remain undocumented in both schema and description.

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 tool 'Expand[s] and analyze[s] a playlist' with 'aggregate benchmarks', specifying the resource and actions. However, it lacks explicit differentiation from siblings like 'expandPlaylist' (which likely only expands) or 'analyzeVideoSet' (which analyzes individual videos rather than playlists).

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 provided on when to use this composite tool versus chaining 'expandPlaylist' and 'analyzeVideoSet' separately, or when partial success is acceptable versus when atomicity is required.

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