get_stream_status

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

Discloses the key status fields returned, which is the core behavioral information. No side effects or prerequisite conditions mentioned, but as a status getter this is sufficient. Since no annotations exist, the description takes on the transparency burden and does reasonably well.

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?

Single sentence, highly concise, front-loaded with the resource and then a list of metrics. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description lists all the information returned. Could be improved by specifying the response type, but the field list provides adequate completeness.

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 takes no parameters, so the description needs no parameter explanation. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools applies.

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?

Describes exactly what it does: retrieves stream output status. Lists specific metrics (active/reconnecting, timecode, duration, congestion, bytes sent, frames) that distinguish it from sibling status tools like get_record_status or get_output_status.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is a generic get_output_status sibling, and the description doesn't explain when to prefer this stream-specific version.

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