Inspect Media Streams

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond these: it relies on ffprobe, works independent of Premiere, and enumerates the metadata categories returned. It stops short of caveats like ffprobe availability or failure behavior.

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 entire description is one tight, information-dense sentence that front-loads the main action and result. Every clause earns its place: the ffprobe method, the metadata fields, read-only safety, and Premiere independence.

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?

With one fully documented parameter, an output schema present, and annotations covering the read-only/idempotent safety profile, the description covers everything an agent needs to select and invoke this tool correctly. The only minor addition would be an example path, but nothing material is missing.

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 100%, with media_path described as 'Existing local media file'. The tool description adds the word 'local' and the ffprobe framing but does not meaningfully elaborate on the parameter beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies because the schema already documents the parameter fully.

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 states a specific action — inspect a local media file via ffprobe — and lists the exact metadata returned (container, stream, codec, time-base, channel, chapter). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling inspect_* tools like inspect_cmx3600_edl or inspect_dom_object, which target different resources.

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 phrase 'local media file' and 'independent of Premiere' establish a clear context for when to use this tool versus project-state inspection tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, which prevents a 5.

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