Get a temporary video URL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and network scope are covered. The description adds only the word 'temporary', signalling that the link expires, but gives no lifetime, refresh behavior, or auth/region constraints, which for a URL-delivery tool would be the genuinely useful context.

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?

One clean sentence with the resource front-loaded and no filler. 'Supplied by TIDAL' is mildly redundant given the tidal_ namespace, but nothing meaningful is wasted.

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 values need not be described, and read-only behavior is annotated, leaving little that must be stated. The main omission is the expiry/refresh semantics of a 'temporary' URL, which an agent actually needs to use the result correctly.

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% for the single video_id parameter, and the description does nothing to compensate: it never explains the expected ID format (the schema's 1-160 char constraint is the only hint) or where such an ID comes from. The parameter name is fairly self-explanatory, which keeps this from being a 1.

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?

States a specific verb (Return) and resource (the temporary playback URL supplied by TIDAL) scoped to a video, so an agent can distinguish it from tidal_get_video or tidal_get_video_image. It stops short of naming the closest sibling, tidal_get_track_url, or explaining how it differs from the video metadata endpoint.

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 explicit guidance on when to call this versus tidal_get_video or tidal_get_track_url, and no stated prerequisites (e.g., that a valid/available video and authentication are required). Usage is only implied by the word 'playback URL'.

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