tokportal_import_bundle_videos_csv

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false and no destructiveHint or idempotentHint, so the description carries the burden—it does well by explaining coverage checks, auto-renewal behavior, and conditional execution. This goes beyond what annotations offer.

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 moderately concise, conveying key behavioral details in 5 sentences. It front-loads the primary action and then covers conditions. However, it could trim some redundancy (e.g., 'or be permanently grandfathered' is detailed but optional).

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 no output schema, the description doesn't clarify what the tool returns or confirm success/failure indicators. The parameter documentation is sufficient, and the behavioral details are good, but the lack of return value description leaves a gap for an AI agent to understand the outcome.

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 descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific details beyond the schema, which is expected at this coverage level. The description gives high-level context but doesn't elaborate on parameters like id or file_path further, 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 the tool imports video slots from CSV and performs multiple related actions (uploads, downloads, configures). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tokportal_add_video_slots or tokportal_configure_bundle_video, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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 important usage context, such as coverage checking and account requirements, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like tokportal_add_video_slots or tokportal_batch_configure_bundle_videos. The coverage renewal details are helpful but no direct sibling differentiation.

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