get_v2_media_info_by_code

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

With no annotations, the description effectively discloses key behaviors: returns 200/404, doesn't return usertags for video, and ad posts may incorrectly return 404. This covers safety and edge-case knowledge beyond the bare minimum.

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?

Four sentences, but the first and last sentences are repetitive ('Get media object' and the 200/404 info). Could be trimmed to two clear sentences without losing information.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers key behavioral aspects but omits the return object structure. The single parameter is trivial but still undefined. Overall adequate but not comprehensive.

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 only parameter 'code' has no description beyond the schema title. While the tool name implies it's a media code, the description does not confirm its format or semantics. Schema coverage is 0%, so description should compensate.

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 it returns media info by code, specifying HTTP response codes (200/404) and noting an alternative for ad posts. However, the structure is slightly redundant with both a technical note and a summary line.

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?

Provides guidance on when not to use (for ad posts, use /v2/media/by/code) and mentions 404 behavior for deleted posts. Does not differentiate from sibling get_v1_media_by_code or get_v2_media_info_by_id, but the note about ads is helpful.

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