Video

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

Adds real value beyond the annotations: it discloses that the call may consume paid credits, mandates confirm=true, and explains that the read-like POST does not publish to social platforms, which reconciles the non-readOnlyHint. It stops short of describing pagination or rate-limit behavior.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by returns and then operational caveats. Efficient, though the returns enumeration is somewhat long for a no-output-schema tool.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields, and it covers the billing/confirm caveat. For a single-URL lookup this is nearly complete; only pagination or failure behavior is unaddressed.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents url, account, and confirm. The description reinforces that the input is a URL and that confirm gates the credit-consuming call, but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Gets Rumble video details by URL') and enumerates the returned fields. An agent can distinguish it from rumble_search, rumble_channel_videos, and rumble_transcript without opening any schema.

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 'by URL' phrasing implies when this applies, and it notes confirm=true is needed for the credit-consuming call. However, it never routes the agent to alternatives such as rumble_transcript for captions or rumble_channel_videos for listings, leaving the choice to inference.

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