list_music_tracksList the project's background music tracks (volume, loop, timing).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_id | Yes | Project ID, as returned by create_project or list_projects |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / project_id / descriptionAdded value: +"Project ID, as returned by create_project or list_projects"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds useful context about the returned properties (volume, loop, timing), going beyond the annotations.
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, front-loaded with verb and resource, 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?
Given simple tool with one param and rich annotations, description explains what is returned (volume, loop, timing). However, could be more explicit about listing all tracks and output structure.
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% for the single parameter, with a good description in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional param information beyond what the schema provides.
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?
Description uses specific verb 'list' and resource 'background music tracks' with properties (volume, loop, timing). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like add_music_track and remove_music_track.
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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives provided. The purpose is implied from sibling tool names, but lacks guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.