Inspect media

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds the important behavioral trait that it does not download the media, which is useful beyond the annotations and clarifies the tool's non-destructive nature. No contradiction exists.

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?

One efficient sentence with no filler; the core action and key non-downloading behavior are 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?

For a simple one-parameter read-only inspection tool, the description covers purpose, output, and the key non-downloading behavior. Minor gaps include no explicit connection to list_supported_sites or failure conditions for unsupported URLs.

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% and the sole url parameter is already well described as a public HTTP/HTTPS media page URL. The tool description mostly restates 'public media URL' and adds no additional syntax, examples, or constraints.

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 uses a specific verb ('Inspect'), a clear resource ('public media URL'), and states the outcome ('return normalized metadata and available formats'), which distinguishes it from sibling download tools.

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?

It clearly implies use when metadata/formats are needed without downloading, and 'without downloading it' contrasts with download_media and download_clip. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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