get_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_channels

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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral detail beyond a plain 'get' — nothing about pagination, response shape, auth requirements, or what the channel list actually contains.

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 tight and waste-free: a one-line purpose, the endpoint for verification, and a parameter line. It earns its place and is appropriately short for a single-parameter read operation.

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?

For a simple read-only call with output schema and safety annotations, it's nominally sufficient. But it does not explain what a DVR is, how this listing differs from sibling channel tools, or what the response contains, so an agent must infer important selection context.

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 carries the burden of documenting dvr_id. It says only 'The ID of the DVR', which merely restates the schema title 'Dvr Id' with no added semantics about how the ID is obtained or validated.

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?

'Get DVR Channels' states a specific verb and resource, and the embedded URL clarifies it returns channels for a given DVR. It is clear on its face, though the phrase largely restates the tool name and it doesn't explicitly differentiate this from sibling channel/routing tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this vs alternatives. It never mentions related tools like list_livetv_epg_channels or get_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_guide, nor any context for when a DVR ID would be available. The description reads as a command line with no usage heuristics.

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