get_stream_urlReturns the live audio stream URLs for KAZM (MP3 and AAC mounts) plus the station web player URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| streams | Yes | ||
| web_player | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description does not need to repeat those. The description adds value by specifying the exact content returned (MP3, AAC, web player URLs) for the KAZM station. No contradictions with 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?
A single clear sentence that front-loads the action and results. No wasted words; every part adds value.
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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema is present, the description sufficiently explains what is returned. The mention of MP3, AAC, and web player URLs covers the likely output fields.
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?
There are zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description is not required to add parameter meaning. Baseline is 4 for no-parameter tools. The description does not include irrelevant parameter info.
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 returns live audio stream URLs for KAZM, specifying MP3 and AAC mounts plus the web player URL. The verb 'Returns' and resource 'live audio stream URLs' make the purpose immediately clear, and the details distinguish it from siblings that cover different data.
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?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. However, the tool has no parameters and a straightforward purpose, so usage is implicitly clear. Lacks any mention of exclusions or alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools have distinct purposes, but there is overlap in areas like listener management (get_listener_profile, get_or_create_listener, register_listener, update_listener_preference, log_listener_history) and alerts (get_emergency_alerts, get_nws_alerts, get_fire_restrictions, get_wildfire_perimeters). This can cause confusion for an agent selecting the appropriate tool.
Tool names mostly follow a verb_noun pattern, but verbs are inconsistent: 'get_', 'search_', 'submit_', 'log_', 'update_', 'register_', 'get_or_create_'. The listener management tools have varying verbs, and there is a mix of specific and generic names. The pattern is readable but not fully consistent.
At 45 tools, the server is overloaded for its stated purpose as a radio station. It covers many unrelated domains (emergency alerts, hiking, chakras, etc.), which would be better split into separate, focused servers. The tool count feels excessive and unfocused.
While the radio-related tools (now playing, requests, schedule, listener management) cover core functionality, the inclusion of many unrelated tools (e.g., hiking trails, chakras, sports scores) dilutes the server's purpose. There are obvious gaps in radio-specific features (e.g., no tool for playlist management or DJ scheduling) but an overabundance of peripheral tools.