stage_get_shot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states that the tool returns 'GetShotResponse with shot data', indicating a read-only operation, but does not explicitly mention read-only nature, authentication needs, or potential side effects. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is minimally adequate.

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 the purpose stated in the first sentence, followed by a structured Args and Returns section. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or extraneous information.

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 simple retrieval tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the purpose, parameters, and return type adequately. It could benefit from mentioning potential errors or that scene_id must correspond to an existing scene, but overall it is sufficient given the tool's simplicity.

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 description coverage is 0%, requiring the description to compensate. The description provides basic meaning for each parameter ('scene_id: Scene identifier', 'shot_id: Shot identifier'), but lacks details on format or constraints. This adds some value beyond the schema's bare type strings.

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 'Get shot details from a scene', specifying the verb 'get', the resource 'shot details', and the context 'from a scene'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stage_add_shot (add) and stage_get_scene (get scene).

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 implies usage for retrieving shot details but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., stage_add_shot for adding shots) or mention any prerequisites or conditions. Usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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