storeVideoSummary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It states the write intent but fails to disclose key details such as whether an existing summary is overwritten, whether it upserts vs. inserts, required permissions, or what the response looks like. The ambiguous 'store or update' phrasing leaves uncertainty.

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 sentence with no filler, immediately conveying the core function. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the action.

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?

Even though the tool is simple with two params and full schema coverage, the absence of annotations and output schema leaves the description incomplete. It does not explain upsert/overwrite behavior, return values, or error conditions, which are essential for reliable invocation.

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 both parameters fully described in the input schema. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 identifies the verb ('Store or update') and resource ('video summary in database'), and the write intent distinguishes it from sibling read/search tools like fetchExistingVideoSummary and get_youtube_transcript. This makes the purpose unambiguous and specific.

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 persisting a summary, and the read/write distinction from siblings is apparent, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or provide any exclusions. No alternative tools are named for update/creation scenarios.

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