live_streams

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the endpoint style ('Non-GraphQL REST endpoint'), the exact return shape, and a server-enforced cap on limit. It does not discuss auth, rate limits, or pagination, but for a simple read-style list those are minor gaps.

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?

Three short sentences deliver resource, endpoint type, return shape, and parameter behavior with no filler. The most identifying information is front-loaded.

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?

This is a low-complexity, single-optional-parameter tool with no output schema, so the description's inclusion of the full response array and limit behavior is nearly complete. Missing auth/pagination details are minor for a simple live-stream listing endpoint.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the only parameter. It does: 'limit (default 40; the server caps it)' adds both the default and a behavioral caveat beyond the schema. It could be more explicit that limit means the maximum number of returned streams.

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 resource ('live shopping streams') and the selection criterion ('currently-open'), and lists the returned fields. It is distinguishable from the sibling feed/search tools by its unique subject, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any sibling.

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?

There is no explicit 'when to use' or alternative routing, but the phrase 'currently-open' implies this is for fetching open live streams rather than historical or search results. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, so guidance is only implied.

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