Get the full details of one video

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety and repeatability profile is fully covered. The description adds the set of fields that come back, which is useful context, but says nothing about auth scope, error behavior for a missing id, or rate limits.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb and resource lead and the field list follows compactly.

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 enumerating the returned fields, which is the main thing an agent would otherwise lack. Remaining gaps are minor for a single-id read tool covered by annotations.

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% and the single video_id parameter is documented well in the schema (numeric id, /videos/ URI, or vimeo.com URL all accepted). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Get the full details of one video") and enumerates the payload (description, embed URL, thumbnail, privacy, tags, transcode status), which signals it is the comprehensive single-video read. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_video_stats, get_video_privacy, or get_download_links, so an agent must infer the boundary from the word "full".

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The description never says to prefer this over get_video_stats, get_video_privacy, or search_videos when a single record is already known by id.

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