cloud_music_playlist_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic function (get details with songs). It does not disclose side effects, permissions, error behavior, or rate limits. As a read operation, it could hint at non-destructiveness, but it remains implicit.

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 concise (one sentence plus an args line) with no wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded. However, it is slightly terse; additional context would not harm conciseness.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain the return structure (e.g., list of songs) and potential errors. It mentions 'including all songs' but lacks details on format or pagination. For a simple tool, it is incomplete.

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?

The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema: it labels 'playlist_id' as '歌单 ID' (playlist ID). With 0% schema description coverage, the description should elaborate on the parameter's source, format, or constraints, but it only repeats the parameter name.

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 '获取歌单详情，包括歌单内所有歌曲' (Get playlist details, including all songs in the playlist). It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('playlist details'), and the scope (all songs) distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_to_playlist or create_playlist.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it. Given the sibling tools (e.g., search, my_playlists), the agent lacks context for selection.

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