listCollections

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds valuable behavioral context with '[~instant]' (performance) and 'local' (scope limitation), but omits mutation status, authentication requirements, error behaviors, or what the return structure looks like.

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 appropriately compact with one dense sentence front-loaded with the core action and resources. The '[~instant]' performance tag is concise shorthand, though slightly informal. No wasted words.

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 this is a simple listing tool with no output schema and only one optional parameter, the description adequately covers the main entities being queried. However, it falls short by not describing the parameter's function or the return value structure, which would be expected for full completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the single boolean parameter 'includeVideoList'. The description fails to mention this parameter or explain what toggling it controls (presumably whether to include full video details versus just counts), leaving its semantics inferred only from the property name.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'local transcript collections' and clarifies what data is returned (active search focus, indexed video/chunk counts). It distinguishes from siblings like 'listCommentCollections' and 'listMediaAssets' by specifying 'transcript' collections, though it could more explicitly contrast with these similar listing tools.

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 includes the performance tag '[~instant]' which hints at speed characteristics, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'listCommentCollections' or 'listChannelCatalog', nor any prerequisites or conditions.

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