get_unused_media

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals no side effects, scope, return value, read-only status, or definition of 'unused media'. The only content is a restatement of the tool name, which provides no behavioral transparency beyond the name itself.

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 brief but under-specified rather than well-structured. 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is filler that does not earn its place, and the remainder only duplicates the tool name. The brevity reflects a lack of content, not efficient communication.

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 large sibling tool set and no output schema or annotations, this description is far from complete. It does not explain what 'unused media' means, what the tool returns, what scope it operates on, or how it differs from related tools like get_used_media_report or get_offline_media, leaving an agent unable to reliably select and call it.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline for a no-parameter tool applies. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed because the input schema is empty and there are no required or optional parameters to explain.

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 is essentially a restatement of the tool name: 'get unused media' adds no new verb or resource detail beyond what is already in 'get_unused_media'. The phrase 'Premiere Pro expanded operation' is generic context and does not clarify what the tool actually does or how it differs from siblings.

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 guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes related tools such as get_used_media_report, get_offline_media, and get_duplicate_media, but the description gives no conditions, use cases, or exclusions that would help an agent choose among them.

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