Show Media Embed Locations

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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only, idempotent profile. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond them: the 2-year maximum date span and the required token permission ('Read detailed stats', including delegation semantics). This is real behavioral disclosure, though it says nothing about pagination limits or result caps.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose and return in the first two sentences, then the constraint, then permissions. The permissions block is lengthy but operationally relevant; the trailing 'Read-only account operation.' is slightly redundant with the annotations but harmless.

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 an 8-parameter analytics tool with no output schema, the description explains the return, the key date constraint, and the auth requirement, which covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. It lacks alternative-routing guidance against sibling analytics tools, keeping it short of complete.

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% with detailed descriptions for every parameter, including exclusion/inclusion date semantics and enum choices, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only adds 'ranked by the chosen metric,' which maps loosely to sort_by but contributes little beyond the enum already in the 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 (Retrieve) and resource (embed location analytics for a video) plus the return shape (list of pages ranked by metric). This clearly distinguishes it from account-level (get_account_embed_locations) and timeseries (get_media_embed_locations_timeseries) siblings without opening their schemas.

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 purpose implies when to use it, and the 2-year date-range constraint is stated, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the closely related get_account_embed_locations or get_media_embed_locations_timeseries tools. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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