get_gql_user_medias

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

No annotations provided. The description implies read-only via HTTP GET but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authorization needs, or what 'user medias' includes. The flat parameter's effect is only in schema, not description.

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 short but repetitive ('Returns the user medias' then 'Get user medias'). It could be more efficient and structured. Not overly long, but contains redundancy.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, and many siblings, the description lacks completeness. It doesn't explain pagination (cursor), flattening behavior, or what constitutes 'user medias'. The tool is underdescribed for its complexity.

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 33% (only flat has a description). The description does not explain any parameter. For a low-coverage schema, the description should compensate but fails to add meaning beyond the schema.

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 'Returns the user medias' which is clear but generic. It includes the HTTP path but doesn't differentiate from many similar sibling tools like get_v1_user_medias_chunk or get_gql_user_clips. The purpose is vaguely conveyed.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. Does not mention pagination, cursor usage, or when to set flat=true. The description offers no context for decision-making.

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