get_track_info

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

The description states the tool does not modify the set, which aligns with the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations. It further discloses the detailed return contents, adding context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 three sentences: main purpose, list of return fields, and sibling references. Every sentence is valuable, and the key info is front-loaded.

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 an output schema present, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers all necessary context including what is included and how it differs from siblings, making it complete for the one-parameter tool.

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 schema already covers the single parameter with 100% description. The description adds context that the track must be a regular track, but does not significantly extend beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool returns detailed state for one regular track without modifying the set. It uses a specific verb 'Return' and resource 'regular track', and distinguishes from siblings by listing alternative tools for different purposes.

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 description explicitly tells when to use this tool (for detailed track state) and when to use alternatives (get_session_info, get_device_parameters, get_clip_info), providing clear guidance for selection.

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