Get Input Deinterlace Field Order

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

Annotations already declare this as read-only and idempotent. The description adds the phrase 'asynchronous input,' which is confusing and potentially misleading since inputs are not typically described as asynchronous. It fails to clarify what happens if the field order is not set, if the input doesn't exist, or what default value is returned.

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 concise sentence with no fluff. It loses a point because the word 'asynchronous' is an unhelpful qualifier that introduces confusion rather than clarifying behavior.

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 parameterless-required getter with no output schema, the description does the bare minimum. The zero-required-parameters setup combined with no elaboration on identifier precedence or default field order values is a notable omission that could frustrate an agent.

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 coverage is 100% since both parameters have simple, self-descriptive descriptions ('Name of the input' and 'UUID of the input'). The description provides no additional detail about parameter interplay, such as whether both can be omitted or if one takes precedence.

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 verb and resource: get the deinterlace field order of an input. It distinguishes itself from the sibling obs-set-input-deinterlace-field-order through the 'get' semantics, and the title precisely matches the 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites such as the input needing to be an interlaced video source. It doesn't mention that one of the two optional parameters should likely be provided, leaving an agent without any direction on invocation context.

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