Identify a CD from any number printed on it: DIDX hub/master IDs (DIDX-2113), label catalog numbers (CK 40999), barcodes, or music-club 'D ######' numbers. Returns artist, album, year, label. Backed by NMLP's Discogs-derived identifier index plus MusicBrainz fallback. Human tool: https://newmexicoliteracyproject.org/cd-lookup
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| identifier | Yes | Whatever is printed on the disc hub, spine, or barcode |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses data sources (Discogs-derived index plus MusicBrainz fallback) and links to human tool, which is useful. However, no annotations are provided, and the description does not mention rate limits, authentication, or side effects. The behavior is adequately described for a read-only lookup.
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 efficient sentences plus a URL. First sentence clearly states purpose and examples; second sentence explains backing. No redundant or unnecessary text.
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?
Despite no output schema, the description explicitly states returned fields (artist, album, year, label). The single parameter is fully specified. All necessary information for an agent to invoke correctly is present.
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%, baseline 3. The description adds concrete examples (DIDX-2113, CK 40999, D ######) beyond the schema description, helping the agent understand acceptable formats.
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?
Specific verb 'Identify', resource 'CD', and lists several concrete identifier types (DIDX IDs, catalog numbers, barcodes, music-club numbers). The description clearly distinguishes this CD-focused tool from sibling tools like nmlp_vinyl_lookup or nmlp_lccn_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?
The description implies use for any CD identifier printed on the disc or packaging, but does not explicitly state when not to use or contrast with siblings. The context is clear enough for an agent to select it for CD queries.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose, from specific identifier lookups (CD, vinyl, LCCN) to donation logistics and first-edition identification. The general resolver (nmlp_resolve) is complementary and well-differentiated.
All tools follow a consistent pattern: 'nmlp_' prefix with descriptive snake_case names (e.g., nmlp_check_coverage, nmlp_identify_first_edition). There is no mixing of conventions.
At 16 tools, the count is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool serves a non-trivial and distinct function across book identification, media lookup, and donation management, justifying the number.
The server covers core identification workflows (first editions, number lines, publisher rules, various identifiers) and donation operations, but lacks appraisal/pricing tools and more granular donation status tracking, which are minor gaps.