tokportal_configure_bundle_video

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

The description discloses behaviors beyond annotations: story screenshot verification, repost credit cost, coverage conditions, auto-renewal, and what happens if coverage cannot renew. Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and non-destructive, which is consistent. No contradiction.

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 description is a single dense paragraph of about 8 sentences. It front-loads the main purpose but could be more structured (e.g., bullet points for conditions) to improve scanability. It adequately conveys information but is not concise.

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 the complexity of the nested object, numerous optional properties, and business rules (coverage, stories, credits), the description covers key constraints and conditions. It does not mention success/error response format, but no output schema is present so this is acceptable. The description is fairly 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds contextual meaning for overall behavior (e.g., story constraints, credit costs) but does not provide additional per-parameter semantics beyond what the schema already offers.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Configure' and the resource 'a video slot', specifying it can be configured as video, carousel, or story. This distinguishes it from siblings like tokportal_add_video_slots (which adds slots) and tokportal_patch_bundle_video (which patches an existing video configuration).

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, including specific rules for stories (single video/image, no description, screenshot verification), credit costs for reposts, and coverage requirements for delivered accounts. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like patch_bundle_video but implies this is for initial configuration or full replacement.

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