thincms_get_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the response includes a 'variants' field with detailed version information (dimensions, WebP format). It does not mention side effects (none expected for a read) or auth requirements, but provides meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 sentences, both highly informative. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds a key output detail. No fluff or repetition. Ideal for quick agent consumption.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description compensates by describing the 'variants' field. It adequately covers what the agent needs to know for a simple retrieval tool. Missing details like error handling or pagination are not critical here.

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%—all three parameters have descriptions. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with a clear verb ('Get') and resource ('single media item by ID'), and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like thincms_list_media (list) and thincms_upload_media (create). It also specifies 'full metadata' and highlights the variants field, which is unique to this tool.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves a single media item by ID, implying usage when a specific item's details are needed. It does not explicitly state when to avoid using it or provide alternatives, but the context against siblings makes it clear.

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