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

No explicit side-effect or read-only statement; annotations do not establish read-only behavior (readOnlyHint is false), and description only implies a retrieval by listing returned fields. Lacks explicit note that no modification occurs.

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?

Two concise sentences; front-loads output contents and input modes, with no filler.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, it enumerates the returned data (album, composer IPI, tempo, key, versions/stems) and input condition, sufficient for correct invocation.

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 documents track_id with examples; description reinforces that it accepts either ID or title and instructs to use the named cue, adding user-facing meaning beyond 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?

States it returns full details of a single cue, including specific metadata fields, and accepts ID or title; distinguishes from search-related siblings by emphasizing a single-track lookup.

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?

Explicitly says to call it when the user names a cue, and specifies input can be track_id or title; does not explicitly name alternatives for search/unknown cues, but gives sufficient condition for use.

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