get_track_media

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits but fails to do so. It does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, side effects, or the meaning of the stream parameter. The description only restates the obvious.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise but undersized. It fails to include essential information that would justify its length, making it more a heading than a useful description.

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 has 4 parameters, an output schema, and a non-trivial domain (Instagram media retrieval), the description is severely incomplete. It lacks details on pagination, streaming, error cases, and output structure, leaving the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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% and the description adds no semantic detail for any of the 4 parameters. It does not explain the expected format of track_id, how page_id is used for pagination, or what the stream and limit parameters control.

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 action ('get') and resource ('media') with a specific identifier ('Instagram track id'), making the tool's primary function obvious. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'track id' rather than other identifiers like hashtag or profile.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives from the sibling list (e.g., search_instagram, get_hashtag_info). The description omits context such as whether this is for retrieval by known track id or for discovery.

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