Hole Mediendetails

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It implies a read-only operation through 'Holt' and adds useful context about returning all image sizes, but it does not explicitly state read-only semantics, auth requirements, or error behavior. This is adequate but not fully transparent.

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 sentence that states the verb, object, and a key detail (all image sizes) with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple get-by-ID 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 low-complexity tool with one fully documented parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the operation's scope and the inclusion of image sizes, leaving little ambiguity for selecting and invoking the 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 coverage is 100% and the only parameter 'id' is already described as 'Media ID'. The description's 'einzelnen Mediendatei' reinforces that the ID identifies a media file, but it does not add substantive meaning beyond the schema.

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 a specific verb ('Holt Details') and a clear resource ('einer einzelnen Mediendatei'), and adds the key differentiator 'inklusive aller Bildgrößen'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like wp_list_media, which lists media files rather than fetching a single one.

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?

The description clearly indicates this is for retrieving a single media file by ID, implying use when detailed info on one item is needed versus listing with wp_list_media. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the single-file focus provides clear usage context.

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