List videos

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, which matches the safe read-only nature of the operation. The description adds valuable behavioral details beyond annotations: pagination behavior, ordering by oldest upload first, and the default status filter behavior. This gives the agent a good understanding of what to expect without overstating.

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: two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately followed by an important pagination/status nuance. Every word earns its place; there is no verbose or extraneous content.

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?

The tool has 4 parameters and no output schema. The description explains pagination, ordering, and status filtering, which combined with the fully self-documenting input schema provides a complete picture for usage. It could potentially mention what fields are returned in the response, but given the absence of an output schema and the clarity of 'list videos', the current description is sufficient.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, including the 'status' default and 'per_page' clamping. The description adds the context that status defaults to all four statuses, which is redundant with the schema. It does not introduce new parameter-level semantics, 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 verb 'List', the resource 'product videos', and the scope 'of the store'. It also specifies pagination and ordering ('oldest upload first'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_video (single video) or upload_video (create). It fully captures 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 clear context for when to use this tool: to list product videos with pagination and status filtering. It explicitly notes that a status filter is required but defaults to all four statuses if omitted, which guides usage. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusionary cases, but the purpose is distinct enough among siblings.

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