media_set_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable detail about the return format (curated view with id, title, kind, ordered assets array with specific fields) and reiterates read-only, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, then return structure, then usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with 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?

For a simple read-only tool with 2 well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the purpose, return contents, and intended usage. It also relates to sibling tools for a complete workflow, making it sufficient on its own.

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 coverage is 100% (both parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add much about the parameters themselves, though it hints at the use case by mentioning 'discover asset ids and current titles', which indirectly clarifies the value of the media_set_id parameter.

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's purpose: 'Get a media_set (gallery) by id' with the specific endpoint. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by framing it as a read operation for discovering asset info, contrasting with update tools like media_set_update_asset_titles.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this to discover asset ids and current titles before calling media_set_update_asset_titles.' This tells the agent exactly when to use the tool and names the related tool, providing clear context and an implicit alternative.

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