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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the returned fields and the effect of full=true, but does not specify default release_status filtering (e.g., whether archived songs appear by default), pagination behavior, or potential large response sizes. This leaves some behavioral ambiguity beyond what is stated.

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 two sentences with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence and the optional full=true behavior in the second. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the return fields and filters, but without an output schema it does not fully clarify the default behavior when release_status is omitted (does it include archived songs?) or whether results are paginated. These gaps make it somewhat incomplete for a tool intended for bulk catalog retrieval.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds the equivalence of full=true to the complete get_song payload, but otherwise repeats what the schema already states, so it adds marginal value over the schema.

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 'List all songs' with specific fields (title, year, chapter, release status, summary) and distinguishes itself from get_song by offering a bulk mode with full=true. The verb and resource are specific, making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'Pass full=true to return each song with the complete get_song payload... in a single call' provides clear context for when to use this tool instead of making multiple get_song calls. It implies a bulk use case, though 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.