tokportal_get_video_ad_code_request

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context: the `code` field is null until status is `in_review` or `finalized`. This explains state transitions beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 three short, efficient sentences. It front-loads the purpose ('Get / poll the ad code for a video') and then adds necessary behavior details. No superfluous words or redundancy.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (polling, null code, statuses). It does not mention error cases or rate limits, but given the annotations and simplicity, it is largely complete. Missing slight detail on whether multiple requests exist (says 'latest').

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%: the single required parameter (id, UUID) has a description 'Video ID.' in the schema. The tool description adds no further meaning to this parameter, so baseline 3 is 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?

The description clearly states 'Get / poll the ad code for a video', specifying the verb (get/poll) and resource (ad code request for a video). It distinguishes this from the sibling create tool (tokportal_create_video_ad_code_request) by being the read/poll version.

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 implies usage for polling ad code by explaining the code field's null behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like the create counterpart or other video-related tools. No exclusions or contextual triggers are provided.

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