bing_videos

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

The description discloses that results are scraped from HTML pages and may return 503 errors on challenges. This adds behavioral context beyond the schema. However, since no annotations are present, the description carries full burden and could disclose more about expected response structure, latency, or usage restrictions. The scraping approach is a key behavioral trait adequately covered.

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 at three sentences, with the primary purpose in the first sentence. Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, locale defaults, and error behavior. No unnecessary words.

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 description adequately covers the tool's purpose, source of data, and key error behavior. However, without an output schema, it does not describe the return format or fields, which could help an agent interpret results. Pagination is implied by page and count but not elaborated. Overall, it covers most essential aspects for a search tool.

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 schema covers all parameters with descriptions. The description adds the default values for country and lang (us, en-us) and implies they are linked via 'locale defaults'. This provides additional semantic context about how the parameters work together. For page and count, the schema already specifies defaults and ranges, so the description adds minimal extra. Overall, it enhances understanding of parameter initialization.

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 explicitly states the tool's action ('Search Bing video results') and resource (video results from Bing). It also clarifies that results are normalized and sourced from Bing's video HTML pages. Among siblings like bing_images and bing_news, it clearly differentiates by focusing on videos.

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 lacks explicit usage guidelines such as when to use this tool versus alternatives like bing_search or bing_images. It does not provide context on when not to use it or what other tools might be better suited for broader searches. The only guidance is technical (locale defaults and error handling).

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