Read one media asset

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read only. Nothing is changed.' is redundant. However, it adds the secret key scope requirement (wv_sk_ with media:read), which is not present in annotations. It does not disclose return format or error behavior, but for a simple read tool this is acceptable.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with 'Read one media asset.' Every sentence adds necessary info: purpose, read-only safety, and auth requirement. No fluff or repetition beyond what is structurally needed.

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 is very simple: one parameter, no output schema, read-only. The description covers purpose and auth, which is mostly sufficient. It omits any mention of the return value, but the name 'get_media' implies a media asset object is returned. A brief note about response would make it fully complete.

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 only parameter 'id' is described in the schema as 'A UUID,' which is minimal. The description does not add further meaning about what the id refers to or how to obtain it. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline is 3, and the description contributes nothing extra for the parameter.

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 'Read one media asset' with a specific verb and resource, and reinforces 'Read only. Nothing is changed.' This distinguishes it from mutation tools like update_media or delete_media and from list_media which would fetch multiple assets.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'Needs a secret key (wv_sk_) carrying the media:read scope,' which tells the agent when authentication is acceptable. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use list_media for multiple assets,' but the singular 'one' implies the specific use case.

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