List Visitors

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description usefully adds the required token scope ('Read detailed stats') and delegation behavior, but 'Read-only account operation' merely restates the annotation and it says nothing about rate limits or result shape.

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, and the remaining lines are structured permission boilerplate. It is a bit verbose relative to what it conveys, but nothing is truly wasted and the ordering is sensible.

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 list endpoint with full annotation coverage, complete schema descriptions and no output schema, the definition supplies purpose plus the auth requirements an agent needs. The one real gap is the absence of any routing between this and get_visitor.

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 already documents page, filter, search, per_page, all_pages and max_items thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 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 precise verb and resource with scope: 'list of visitors that have watched videos in your account.' This tells an agent exactly what is returned and is distinguishable from the singular get_visitor sibling by the plural resource. It does not explicitly name or contrast the alternative, so it stays at 4.

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 description explains required token permissions but gives no when-to-use vs when-not guidance and never mentions the sibling get_visitor for single-visitor lookups. The only 'guidance' is an auth prerequisite, not a selection criterion.

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