appleMusic_album_getGet an Apple Music album by id or album URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Optional Apple Music album URL for the request. | |
| albumId | No | Optional Apple Music album id for the request. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds the input methods but does not describe return format, authentication needs, or any other behavioral traits. It does not contradict annotations and adds minimal extra context beyond the schema.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It efficiently conveys the action and input options, making it appropriately sized for a simple get tool.
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 tool is incomplete in terms of context. Both parameters are optional in the schema, but the description says 'by id or album URL', implying one is needed—this ambiguity is unresolved. There is no information on return values (no output schema), no guidance on choosing between id and URL, and the openWorldHint suggests data might be incomplete, which is not addressed. More context is needed for an agent to invoke this 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%: both url and albumId have descriptions. The description repeats the same information ('by id or album URL') without adding format details or clarifying that at least one parameter is effectively required, despite the schema marking both as optional. This creates ambiguity but the schema already documents the parameters adequately.
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 action (Get), the resource (Apple Music album), and the two input forms (id or album URL). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like appleMusic_artist_get and appleMusic_track_get, which target different resource types.
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?
There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, such as 'for tracks use appleMusic_track_get', nor any conditions that would select this tool over others. Usage context is only implied by the resource name.
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 is clearly scoped to a specific platform and action (e.g., facebook_post_get vs instagram_post_get). Descriptions explicitly differentiate similar tools across platforms, and within-a-platform tools like tiktok_search_videos_list vs tiktok_search_hashtag_list have clear disambiguation notes.
All 167 tools follow a strict `platform_resource_action` pattern (e.g., youtube_video_comments_list). No mixing of styles—snake_case throughout, with consistent verb ordering (get, list, search, etc.).
The server has 167 tools, which is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the broad multi-platform scope justifies many tools, this extreme number makes the tool surface overwhelming and difficult for an agent to navigate efficiently.
The tool set covers a wide range of platforms and operations including profile retrieval, post/video fetching, comments, search, transcripts, and ad library access. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no Facebook events or LinkedIn messaging), but the surface is comprehensive for a read-only data aggregation use case.