Show Media Extended Audio Description

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so 'Read-only account operation' largely restates the structured data. The genuinely additive detail is that the response includes download links, which is useful but thin beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and lookup key, with no filler. Slightly tighter wording could fold the safety note in, but it is efficient overall.

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?

For a simple single-resource read with no output schema, the description conveys the key, the payload (download links) and the safety profile. It is adequate, though it does not mention error behavior when the id is missing or invalid.

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 100%, so both 'id' and 'account' semantics are already documented in the schema, including the note that 'account' selects credentials rather than a remote ID. The description mentions only the hashed id and adds nothing the schema does not already carry.

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 names a specific verb (retrieves), a singular resource (a single extended audio description), the lookup key (hashed id), and the payload (download links). It clearly reads as the single-item fetch counterpart to the sibling list_media_extended_audio_descriptions, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

The phrase 'by its hashed id' implies the tool is for fetching one known record, which implicitly distinguishes it from the list and delete siblings. However, it never states when to prefer this over list_media_extended_audio_descriptions or what to do if the id is unknown, so guidance is only implied.

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