Cancel media range

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

Annotations already indicate mutating, non-idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the optional pause side effect, but it does not disclose what happens when pause is false (e.g., whether playback continues) or what occurs if no active range is present. It adds some context beyond annotations but lacks depth.

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 sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes the optional pause behavior. Every word earns its place; there is no wasted text or redundancy.

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 3 parameters with none required, yet the description does not clarify that at least one of mediaId or mediaName must be provided to identify the media source. It also does not specify behavior when no active range exists. Although an output schema exists (not shown), the ambiguity around parameter usage is a significant gap for a mutating 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?

Schema descriptions cover mediaId and mediaName (67% coverage), which is high enough to warrant a baseline of 3. The description itself adds no parameter information, and pause lacks any schema description. Since the description does not clarify parameter relationships (e.g., that at least one identifier is needed), it does not elevate the score.

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 action (cancel) and the target (active range enforcement for a Media Source), distinguishing it from siblings like media_play_range (which starts a range) and media_control (general control). The verb is specific and the resource is well-defined.

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 implies usage when an active range exists, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare against alternatives like media_play_range or media_control. There are no stated exclusions or conditions, so an agent must infer the appropriate context.

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