retrieve_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action; it does not disclose authentication requirements, error behavior, or what 'metadata' includes. The verb 'retrieve' implies read-only, but no other behavioral traits are shared.

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, front-loaded sentence without any filler or redundancy. It efficiently conveys the core purpose, making it appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain at least the return value's nature or the scope of 'metadata,' but it does not. The tool is simple, but the description lacks sufficient detail to fully prepare an agent for invocation or result handling.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not mention the mediaId parameter at all. While the parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to add meaning beyond the schema's type definition, leaving the agent without guidance on how to obtain or format the ID.

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 uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('uploaded media metadata'), clearly indicating a read operation. It is distinct from sibling tools like delete_media and send_file, which have different purposes.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as send_file for sending media or create_upload_media for uploading. The description simply states the action without context or exclusions.

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