bosch_camera_stream_url

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses network and credential requirements, the absence of cloud relay, and implies read-only behavior via 'Get'. It does not explicitly state it is non-destructive, but the context is sufficient for a retrieval operation.

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 concise with two short paragraphs. The first states the core purpose, the second adds necessary prerequisites. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no annotations), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and output usage (ffmpeg/VLC/go2rtc). The existence of an output schema compensates for missing return value details. Slightly more explanation of the parameter format would improve completeness.

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 single 'camera' parameter lacks a schema description (0% coverage). The description partially clarifies it by referencing local config, but does not explicitly state whether it expects a name or ID, leaving some ambiguity.

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 a LAN RTSPS stream URL for one camera, distinguishing it from cloud relay and sibling tools that handle other camera operations. The verb 'Get' and resource 'LAN RTSPS stream URL' are specific and unambiguous.

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 provides clear prerequisites (same network, local credentials) that define when the tool can be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context and sibling list imply this is the only stream URL tool.

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