Get FFmpeg result download URL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying the job must be completed and that the file is not streamed through MCP, providing behavioral context beyond annotations.

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, well-structured sentence that immediately states the primary action. It is concise with no unnecessary words, earning its place.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not shown) and the parameter is simple, the description adequately covers the purpose and behavior. It mentions the key constraint (job completion) and the non-streaming aspect, making it complete for a straightforward read operation.

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%, and the description does not explain the single required parameter 'jobId' beyond implying it refers to a completed FFmpeg job. The description does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving the agent to infer its source.

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 tool returns the download URL and metadata for a completed FFmpeg job, and explicitly distinguishes it from streaming the file through MCP. The verb 'returns' and resource 'download URL' are specific.

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 indicates it is for completed jobs and mentions 'without streaming', implying an alternative that does stream, but does not explicitly name that alternative or provide when-not guidelines. This is clear context but not exhaustive.

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