nvr_get_channel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it does add one genuinely useful behavioral fact: credential fields are redacted in the response. It says nothing about read-only nature, authentication requirements, or what happens when the id does not exist.

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?

A single terse sentence with zero waste, and the resource plus scoping constraint are front-loaded. It is arguably too sparse for a tool with no annotations, but nothing is redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be explained, and the redaction note covers response content. However, with no annotations and no auth or not-found behavior described, the definition is only minimally sufficient for an agent to call it confidently.

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?

There is a single required parameter with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. "By id" conveys that channel_id is the channel identifier, but adds no format, source, or validation detail beyond the parameter name.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (get a single channel) and scopes it to lookup by id, which implicitly contrasts with the sibling nvr_list_channels. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

"One channel by id" implies you must already have a channel id, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus nvr_list_channels, nvr_get_channel is the singular counterpart of, nor any prerequisite or error condition noted.

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