ghl_conversation_get_message_recording

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. The description goes beyond by specifying the exact response format (audio/x-wav, Content-Disposition), that it is not JSON, and the required scopes. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with the critical warning first, then title,restatement, and technical details. It has minor redundancy (e.g., repeating 'Get Recording by Message ID' in both the first line and later) but is otherwise concise.

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 no output schema, the description covers the response format and binary nature well. It also includes endpoint and OAuth scopes. It lacks error handling or size limits, but is sufficient for a simple retrieval 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters described ('Message ID as string', 'Location ID as string'). The description does not add additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 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 that it gets a recording (audio) for a message, distinguishing it from other conversation/get message tools that return JSON. The title 'Get Recording by Message ID' and the phrase 'Get the recording for a message' specify the verb and resource.

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 warns that the response is NOT JSON and is binary audio, telling callers to handle a binary/audio body. It also provides the endpoint and OAuth scopes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or list alternatives.

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