Get a TIDAL video image

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is already covered by structured data. The description adds essentially nothing beyond what the schema parameters imply ('dimensions'); it discloses no URL expiry, CDN behavior, fallback sizing, or auth requirement for a tool that clearly makes an open-world request.

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?

A single short sentence with no padding, but the brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than tightness. It is front-loaded and readable, yet leaves the core identifier undocumented.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not required, which keeps the tool's overall burden low. However, with 0% parameter coverage and no usage or behavioral context, the definition is only barely adequate for correct invocation.

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% across 3 parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails it. It alludes to dimensions (width/height) but gives no defaults, bounds, units, or aspect-ratio behavior, and never mentions video_id at all, despite it being the sole required 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 states a clear verb ('Return') and resource ('an image URL') with the qualifier 'at the requested dimensions', so an agent knows this is a dimension-configurable image fetch. It does not differentiate itself from the many sibling image getters (tidal_get_album_image, tidal_get_artist_image, tidal_get_playlist_image) or from tidal_get_video_url, but the action itself is 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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites (e.g., needing a valid video_id or the auth requirement implied by tidal_auth_status), and no routing to alternative tools such as tidal_get_video_url or tidal_get_video. The agent must infer selection purely from the tool name.

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