Build stream url

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

The description says this tool builds a URL, implying a pure string construction with no state change, while annotations set `readOnlyHint: false`. That conflicts with the apparent side-effect-free nature of the tool, and no further behavioral context (auth, stream start, return type) is disclosed.

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 front-loaded with the URL template, then gives a clearly structured Args list. Every line adds usable detail and there is no filler.

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?

It covers the URL format and all parameters thoroughly, but with no output schema it should state what is returned, such as a URL string, and clarify whether it merely constructs the URL or also starts a stream. Those gaps matter given the annotation conflict.

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 carries the full burden and does so well. It documents all six parameters: `channel` as virtual channel or RF frequency, `tuner` index or `None` for auto, `by_frequency` addressing mode, `program` only with `by_frequency`, `duration`, and `transcode`.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource: build a live-stream URL, and even gives the exact URL path template. The main gap is that it does not distinguish itself from the very similar sibling `hdhomerun_build_live_tv_url`.

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 explains parameter forms but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no exclusion rules. An agent must infer when to choose this builder versus `hdhomerun_build_live_tv_url` or other streaming-related tools.

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