get_discography

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

With no annotations and a generic description, the tool does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, error behavior, or data freshness. The description only states the action without any side-effect or safety context.

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, clear sentence that is appropriately short. However, it sacrifices crucial details for brevity, which slightly reduces its effectiveness. Still, it is well-structured and front-loaded.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and multiple sibling tools, the description fails to provide complete context. It does not specify input parameter purposes, output structure, or appropriate usage scenarios, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the meaning of 'value' (likely artist ID/name) or 'max_releases' limit. The parameter names provide minimal intuition, but the description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema itself.

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 specifies the verb 'Fetch', the resource 'artist's full discography', and enumerates contents like albums, singles, and compilations. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_album, get_track, and others that focus on individual items.

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 using this tool when needing an artist's entire discography, but it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. There is no mention of preferring other tools for specific albums or tracks.

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