cast_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context that this tool reports on the 'media en cours' and returns detailed info, but it does not disclose specifics like response shape or potential limitations. With annotations carrying the main behavioral burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded, complete sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the action and target resource economically and is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter read-only tool.

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 parameterless read-only tool with strong annotations and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient: an agent knows it can safely call this to get detailed current-media info. The main gap is the missing distinction from cast_status, but the invocation itself is fully clear.

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?

There are zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter ambiguity. Baseline for a parameterless tool is 4; the description adds no parameter semantics but none are needed.

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 verb 'Retourne' and the resource 'les infos detaillees du media en cours', so an agent knows this is an information retrieval tool. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling cast_status, which likely serves a similar status-reporting purpose, so it falls short of a 5.

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 guidance is given about when to choose this tool over alternatives such as cast_status or cast_scan. The description implies it is for the current media, but it does not state exclusions or explicitly route the agent to a sibling for other needs.

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