Accepts an array of song slugs and returns fresh signed stream URLs for all of them in one call. Use this ~2 minutes before stream URLs expire to keep playback uninterrupted.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slugs | Yes | Array of song slugs to refresh, e.g. ["holding-on","without-you"] |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With empty annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the batch behavior ('all of them in one call') and the timing logic, but does not describe error handling, partial failures, authentication requirements, or whether the operation is strictly read-only. This is adequate but not deeply transparent, so a 3 is appropriate.
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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and benefits. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or fluff.
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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and empty annotations, the description covers the purpose, usage timing, and batch behavior comprehensively. It explains what the tool returns (fresh signed URLs) and when to invoke it, making it sufficient for an agent to select and use the tool correctly.
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% as the only parameter 'slugs' already has a clear description with an example. The tool description adds minimal extra parameter semantics—only reinforcing that all slugs are processed in one call. Thus, the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage is fitting.
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 the tool's function: accepting song slugs and returning fresh signed stream URLs in one call. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_song or list_songs, which focus on retrieval rather than refreshing expiring URLs.
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 says when to use this tool ('~2 minutes before stream URLs expire') and the intended benefit ('keep playback uninterrupted'). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but given the sibling tools are not URL refresh tools, the context is clear enough to warrant a 4 rather than a 5.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct resource and action: artist profile, chapter details, curated experience playlist, experience presentation directives, individual song, chapter list, song list, and stream URL refresh. The only potential overlap is between get_song and list_songs with full=true, but descriptions clarify the use cases.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_*, list_*, refresh_*) with snake_case, making it easy to predict tool names and understand their function.
8 tools is well within the ideal range for a read-only music catalog server. Each tool has a clear purpose and the set feels neither bloated nor sparse.
The tool surface covers the full user journey: discovering the artist, browsing chapters and songs, retrieving detailed song data, accessing curated experiences, and refreshing stream URLs. No obvious missing operations for a read-only API.
