Show Related Media Customizations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context by specifying the required permission scopes and the delegated-token authorization behavior, which the annotations do not convey.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by the permission block. The trailing 'Read-only account operation' slightly duplicates the readOnlyHint annotation, and the fenced permission block is verbose, but the structure is clean and information-bearing.

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 a read-only getter with 100% schema coverage and full annotations, the description covers purpose, returned fields, and auth requirements. With no output schema present, it could hint at the response envelope, but nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 schema fully documents media_id and account. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 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 ('Fetches') and resource ('related-media customizations'), and the parenthetical elaborates exactly what those are (which videos to recommend, when to show them, label and button text). This clearly distinguishes it from the many sibling customization getters like get_appearance_customizations or get_playback_customizations.

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?

It says the customizations are 'explicitly-set,' which subtly implies defaults may apply, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no reference to the sibling update_related_media_customizations as the write counterpart. Usage is only implied.

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