resolve_station_stream_url

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that the call 'also counts as a click,' which is a non-obvious side effect. However, it does not explain consequences of that click, any auth requirements, rate limits, or error behavior, leaving significant behavioral context unstated.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by the critical side-effect note. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description states the primary return value (the current stream URL) and the endpoint, which is helpful given there is no output schema. However, it omits timeout behavior, the practical meaning of 'counts as a click,' and guidance on when to choose this tool over a sibling like register_station_click. It is adequate for a simple tool but has clear gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that station_uuid identifies the target station and that the operation resolves its stream URL, but it does not explain the timeout parameter at all. The timeout's unit, meaning, and effect remain undocumented, and the description only partially covers parameter semantics.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get the current stream URL for a station.' It also includes the API endpoint pattern, which reinforces what the tool does. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_station_by_uuid (metadata) and register_station_click (explicit click registration), especially with the side-effect note.

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: call this when you need the stream URL rather than station metadata, and be aware it also counts as a click. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention any alternatives, such as get_station_by_uuid for metadata-only needs or register_station_click for explicit click registration.

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