playlist_add_marker

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Add a playlist marker' without disclosing side effects, whether the operation is undoable, if it requires a specific state (e.g., playlist open), or what happens on failure. Minimal behavioral 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 sentence, making it highly concise and front-loaded. However, it may be too minimal for effective use, but for conciseness criterion it meets the bar well.

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 tool has 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't clarify the result of adding a marker, any constraints on positioning, or behavior when the marker name is omitted.

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%, meaning the description does not explain the parameters. The parameter names ('position_bars', 'name') are somewhat clear but the description adds no extra meaning. For a required parameter like position_bars, it's unclear if it's in bars or beats, and what format is expected.

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 'Add a playlist marker' clearly states the action (add) and the resource (playlist marker). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'playlist_delete_marker' and 'playlist_list_markers', making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or context such as needing an active playlist or that markers are added to the current playlist.

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