media_inspect

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

With no annotations, the description effectively conveys that the tool is non-destructive ('Does not modify files') and lists the metadata fields inspected. However, it lacks details on supported file formats, size limits, or error handling.

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 minimal and to the point, with two sentences that add essential information without any redundant or extraneous content.

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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core functionality and non-modification behavior. It would benefit from mentioning the return format or supported file types for fuller guidance.

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 sole parameter 'path' has no schema description (0% coverage) and the tool description does not clarify its expected format (e.g., absolute/relative) or constraints beyond being a non-empty string.

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 it inspects image or video metadata (dimensions, codecs, duration, size) and does not modify files, distinguishing it from sibling tools like image_compress or video_compress.

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 metadata inspection without modification, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like prepare_for_ai or media_cleanup, nor provides exclusions.

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