cassette_get_clip

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

With no annotations, the description is solely responsible for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get', implying read-only, but does not confirm idempotency, required permissions, or error conditions. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 extremely concise with one sentence and no wasted words. However, the brevity sacrifices necessary detail, making it less helpful than a slightly longer description would be.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description is minimally complete for retrieving a clip by ID. However, it omits context about how to find the ID, what the response contains, and any prerequisites. An agent would lack enough information to use the tool effectively.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'by ID' but does not elaborate on the parameter's format, constraints, or how to obtain the clipId. The parameter name is self-explanatory but the description adds no meaningful detail beyond what the name implies.

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 action (get) and resource (a creator clip by ID). It is specific and unambiguous, though it does not differentiate from other 'get' tools like cassette_get_track or cassette_get_final.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cassette_list_clips for multiple clips, or other get tools). The description lacks any usage context or exclusion criteria.

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