cassette_list_assets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds one useful behavioral trait: the returned assets are scoped to a single session. However, it does not explain required inputs, whether both session_id and chat_id are needed, or any pagination/filtering specifics.

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?

One direct sentence with no filler. The primary action and resource are front-loaded, and the scoping detail follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

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?

Although an output schema exists and the tool is conceptually simple, the lack of parameter guidance makes it incomplete. An agent cannot reliably know whether to supply session_id, chat_id, or both, especially with no required parameters and zero schema descriptions.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented chat_id and session_id parameters. It mentions 'one Cassette session' but never clarifies which parameter identifies that session or what chat_id means in relation to it.

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 states a specific action ('List'), a concrete resource ('media assets'), and a clear scope ('isolated to one Cassette session'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cassette_ingest_media or cassette_timeline, so an agent can identify its 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 phrase 'isolated to one Cassette session' implies this tool is for retrieving assets within a session, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives, nor does it mention any conditions or exclusions.

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