Probe media

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

The description implies a read-only operation ('Inspect') but does not explicitly state that the tool does not modify the file or system state. It also does not mention potential performance impact from running ffprobe. With no annotations to rely on, the description should be more explicit about safety and side effects.

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 sentence of 17 words, extremely concise, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word is informative, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 provides a high-level overview of the output ('structured format and stream metadata') but lacks detail about the exact fields or structure returned. Since there is no output schema, the description should offer more specifics to help the agent understand the return value. However, for a simple tool with 3 parameters, it is minimally adequate.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Per guidelines, baseline is 3, and no extra value is offered, so score remains 3.

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 inspects local media files using ffprobe and returns structured metadata. The verb 'probe' and resource 'media' are explicit, and the description differentiates from potential sibling tools by mentioning 'ffprobe' and 'structured format and stream metadata'.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations (e.g., file formats), or when not to use it. Since no sibling tools are listed, the description misses an opportunity to clarify its specific role.

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