User Videos

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond this: paid API credit consumption, the confirm=true requirement, non-publishing read-like POST behavior, pagination via cursor, and a trim option for lighter responses.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded, followed by return fields and then operational constraints. The long field list is justified because there is no output schema, though it makes the description dense.

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 no output schema, the description usefully lists returned fields and covers credits, confirm=true, pagination, and trim behavior. It is nearly complete, though it lacks error handling details and does not clarify the cursor or trim mechanics absent from the schema.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces confirm=true but does not explain sort_by or filter_by beyond their enum names, and it mentions cursor and trim despite neither appearing in the input schema.

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: fetches a list of videos for a Twitch user, with a 100 max scope. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like twitch_clip or twitch_profile, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to alternatives is provided. The operational note about credits and confirm=true is a prerequisite, not routing guidance for selecting this tool over twitch_clip, twitch_profile, or twitch_user_schedule.

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