Get recorded files

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

The annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful context by naming the endpoint and noting that each recording includes its own `CmdURL`/`PlayURL`, but it does not cover pagination, empty-result behavior, auth requirements, or overall response shape.

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 with no filler. Every element, the HTTP method, storage URL, file name, and returned item URLs, contributes directly to understanding the operation.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description gives the core behavior and a hint about returned fields. It remains incomplete regarding how an agent should source or format `storage_url` and what the full response looks like beyond each item's playback URLs.

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 schema only says `storage_url` is a string. The description partially compensates by showing that the parameter is a storage base URL used with `recorded_files.json`, but it does not explain how to obtain the URL, its expected format, or whether it includes a trailing slash.

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 HTTP GET against `recorded_files.json` and explains that the result is a list of recordings available for playback. It is clearly a read/list operation, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby tools such as `hdhomerun_list_recording_rules` or `hdhomerun_delete_recording`.

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 'available for playback' implies when an agent would use this tool, namely to enumerate playable recordings. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance or named alternatives for related tasks like listing recording rules or deleting recordings.

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