tokportal_import_bundle_videos_csv

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

Annotations are minimal (readOnlyHint false, etc.), so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses multiple behavioral traits: coverage checking before media operations, automatic renewal attempts for active periods, and safe abort if renewal fails. This goes beyond simple 'import CSV' to explain potential side effects and preconditions. The description adds significant value beyond annotations.

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 concise with 5 sentences covering purpose, process, prerequisites, and edge cases. It front-loads the main action. The complex renewal logic adds necessary depth without being verbose. A small deduction for not starting with a one-liner that immediately distinguishes from siblings.

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 explains what happens (import, coverage check, media fetch) but doesn't clarify return value or status. Given the complexity (multipart upload, coverage renewal), the description is fairly complete. It explains preconditions and abort behavior, which is critical for a potentially destructive operation. Slight gap: doesn't mention whether the tool returns a task ID or status.

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 does not add detail about parameter meanings beyond the schema (e.g., 'id' is bundle ID, 'file_path' is the CSV path). It mentions 'uploads a CSV file' which relates to file_path but adds no new constraints or format guidance. The auto_publish and idempotency_key are not elaborated.

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 a CSV file, uploads the CSV, downloads media, and configures slots. The verb 'import' is specific, and the resource 'bundle videos CSV' is clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tokportal_add_video_slots' by emphasizing bulk CSV import rather than individual slot management.

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 context for when to use: when a CSV file needs to be processed for video slots. It implicitly suggests it's not for single-slot operations. It includes coverage prerequisites and renewal behavior for delivered saved accounts, which helps decide whether to use this tool given account state. However, it lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance.

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