stremio_cast_play

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the two operating modes (direct HTTP stream vs torrent engine file) and the target device family, but says nothing about side effects such as interrupting current playback, prerequisite device discovery, or how failures are surfaced.

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 core action is front-loaded in the first sentence and the two supporting sentences carry the input-mode rules with no filler. Slightly awkward phrasing ('local torrent engine file') but structurally tight.

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 return values need not be explained. Yet with zero annotation coverage and 0% schema coverage, the description leaves gaps: resume_position_ms is undocumented and the casting side-effects/preconditions are unaddressed, so it is only minimally sufficient for a 5-parameter action tool.

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%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully explains device (discovered id or exact name), stream_url, and the info_hash + file_index pairing, covering most parameters, but it completely omits resume_position_ms, leaving one of five parameters unexplained anywhere.

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 a specific verb+resource+target: 'Play an HTTP stream or local torrent engine file on Chromecast or DLNA.' Naming the device family implicitly distinguishes it from stremio_desktop_play and play, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings.

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?

It tells the agent how to supply inputs (device accepts a discovered id or exact name; pass stream_url OR info_hash + file_index), which implies usage. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over stremio_desktop_play, play, or stremio_cast_control, nor that stremio_cast_devices should be run first to resolve a device id.

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