cassette_get_track

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

No annotations provided. The description adds context about output content but doesn't disclose side effects, permissions, or idempotency. For a read-only tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence defines the action, second provides usage guidance. Perfectly 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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the return value ('full metadata and file references'). For a simple get tool with one parameter, it is largely complete, though missing error modes.

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?

Only one parameter 'trackId' with no schema description. The description mentions 'by ID' but doesn't explain format or source, leaving the agent to infer. Schema coverage is 0% and description does not 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 clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'track by ID', and the output 'with full metadata and file references'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cassette_get_clip'.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use after creation to verify the workflow', providing a clear usage context. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use, but sufficient for a simple get tool.

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