get_session_recordings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states the return type ('video and/or audio stream/download links') but does not mention potential errors, empty results, authorization needs, or any side effects. The guidance is adequate but minimal.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement, a follow-up on return value, a practical prerequisite hint, and a compact Args list. Every sentence adds value and the layout is easy to scan.

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?

An output schema exists, so the tool description need not detail return values. The prerequisite call to get_participants is included, and all three required parameters are listed. For a straightforward retrieval tool with three parameters, the description is sufficiently complete, though it could mention handling of missing recordings.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description's Args section must compensate. It provides simple definitions ('unique identifier') that are largely redundant with the parameter names. The hint to use get_participants to obtain participant_id and session_id adds practical value, but study_id remains underexplained.

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 opens with 'Get recording URLs (video/audio) for a specific session,' clearly specifying the action and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_session_report or get_session by focusing on recording media links, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs users to 'Call get_participants first to find the correct participant_id and session_id,' providing a clear prerequisite and workflow context. It does not, however, enumerate alternative tools or explicitly state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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