Get daylist context for right now

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint: true, so the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It does so richly: it discloses the computed mood lift metric, historical dominance data, and the purpose of recent daylist titles. This goes well beyond the annotation, though it does not cover edge cases or error behavior.

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 beginning with 'Everything needed...'. It is dense but contains no fluff, and each clause earns its place. The long list-style structure is slightly run-on but efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by fully enumerating the returned context: time/part of day, mood lifts, artists/genres/tags, recent listens, and recent daylist titles. Combined with complete schema coverage for the two optional parameters, it is thoroughly complete for a read-only context tool.

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% with both parameters (hour_of_day, recent_runs) already described. The description adds no new parameter syntax or format details; it only implicitly relates them to the daylist generation workflow. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb and resource: 'Get daylist context'. It enumerates the exact contents (local time, part of day, mood lifts, artists/genres/tags, recent listens, recent daylist titles), making it easy for an agent to understand what the tool provides and how it differs from siblings like get_vibe_profile or listening_history.

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 says 'Everything needed to generate this hour's daylist', which gives clear context for when to use this tool. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the purpose is well-scoped relative to the listed siblings.

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