get_v1_media_by_code

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses no behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, side effects, or any constraints. The agent has no insight into what happens when calling this tool.

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 extremely short, but brevity comes at the cost of missing crucial information. It does not effectively convey the tool's purpose or usage, making it under-specified rather than concise.

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?

Given the tool's single parameter and multiple siblings, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain the return value (no output schema), nor does it differentiate from similar tools. The description fails to provide a complete picture for correct selection and 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description adds no explanation for the 'code' parameter. The title 'Media By Code' hints at its purpose, but the description does not clarify what a code is or how to obtain it. This leaves the parameter meaning ambiguous.

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 it 'Get media object', which gives a clear verb and resource. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_v1_media_by_id or get_v2_media_info_by_code, as it doesn't clarify what a 'code' is relative to other identifiers. The purpose is adequate but lacks specificity.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that retrieve media by different identifiers (e.g., by id, by url), the description offers no context for choosing this one. This leaves the agent without decision support.

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