Get a release file

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'retrieve metadata' aligns with that. The description adds value by specifying that metadata includes the processing state, providing more context beyond annotations.

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?

Single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Retrieve metadata') and concisely specifies the resource and included information. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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 read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It names the asset types and the included processing state. However, it could be slightly more complete by hinting at other metadata fields returned, but not strictly necessary.

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 50% (asset_type described, release_id not). The description mentions 'square or tall' reinforcing asset_type but does not clarify release_id or add meaning beyond the schema. It partially compensates for asset_type but not for the missing release_id description.

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 tool retrieves metadata about a release animated cover video asset, specifying square or tall, including processing state. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_track_file' and 'get_release' by focusing on motion artwork video assets.

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 (when metadata about a release's motion artwork is needed) but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or context about prerequisites are provided.

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