vast42_get_closed_caption_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool 'gets' a file, which implies a read operation, but it does not disclose error handling, return format, permission needs, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant under-disclosure even for a simple read tool.

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, clear sentence: 'Get a single VAST 4.2 closed caption file'. Every word contributes meaning, and the verb and resource are front-loaded. There is no fluff or irrelevant detail.

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?

Despite having only one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the action and resource but does not specify what the tool returns (file content vs. metadata) or error behavior. For a simple GET tool, this is acceptable but leaves clear gaps that could hinder an agent's expectations.

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 provides 100% description coverage for the only parameter 'id', describing it as 'VAST 4.2 closed caption file ID'. The description adds no additional parameter information, but the schema already defines the parameter meaning, so the description is not required to compensate.

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 uses 'Get' as a specific verb and clearly specifies the resource 'VAST 4.2 closed caption file'. The word 'single' distinguishes it from listing tools, and the resource name differentiates it from other get tools for different entities. This strongly clarifies what the tool does.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description implies it is for fetching a single file by ID, but it does not mention when to use list, create, or update tools, nor any exclusion criteria. Usage is therefore only implied, not clearly stated.

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