free_video_search

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as read/write nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. The only hint is 'Returns: Text content with the video search results,' which minimally indicates the output type but offers no transparency into tool behavior.

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 short and lists parameters in a bullet-like format, making it easy to scan. However, it is slightly redundant with the schema and could be more concise by omitting parameter defaults already in schema. It is appropriately front-loaded with the tool's name in Chinese but lacks a clear summary of what the tool does.

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 search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain the output format (beyond 'Text content'), pagination, filtering behavior, or how to interpret results. Given the complexity and sibling tools, more details are needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description carries the full burden. It provides Chinese labels for each parameter (e.g., '搜索查询' for query, '安全搜索等级' for safe_search) and lists defaults, adding some meaning beyond the schema. However, it lacks constraints or explanations for valid values (e.g., safe_search as string, time_range format), limiting semantic depth.

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 begins with '视频搜索' (video search) and lists parameters, clearly indicating the tool's purpose of searching videos. While it distinguishes from siblings by its name, it does not explicitly differentiate its capabilities from similar search tools (e.g., free_image_search, free_general_search). The purpose is specific enough for an agent to understand the tool's function.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions. The agent is left to infer usage from the name and sibling context alone.

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