IvedaAI: Streaming

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context by explaining that responses include a status code and that 'truncated'/'timedOut' flags signal cut-off responses. This helps the agent interpret abnormal results, though it omits authentication specifics.

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 compact and well-structured, with a brief response note followed by the two endpoint listings. The opening 'IvedaAI API —' is slightly redundant, but the rest of the text is efficient and free of unnecessary filler.

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 read-only streaming tool with strong annotations and schema coverage, the description adequately covers operations, required path parameters, and response status semantics. It lacks explicit mention of output content type (e.g., image binary) or authentication, but remains sufficient for agent invocation.

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 generic input schema provides 100% description coverage for its standard properties, but the operation-specific path parameters (cameraId:integer, type:enum:live) are only described in the tool description. This adds concrete detail beyond the schema's generic 'path' object, enhancing parameter understanding.

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 identifies the tool's purpose as streaming operations and lists two specific GET endpoints: retrieving a camera streaming image (.jpg) and a motion JPEG (.mjpeg). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ivedaai_camera or ivedaai_footage by its focus on streaming.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and endpoint list, but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving the agent to infer context from the 'Streaming operations' label.

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