resolve_music_query

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose one useful trait: the tool resolves to stream metadata rather than starting playback. It says nothing about whether the lookup is read-only, what happens on no match, or any external service/auth dependency, so a meaningful gap remains.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the input/output framing, with examples that earn their space by clarifying the parameter. No filler whatsoever.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the single-parameter surface is small. The main missing piece is the relationship to play_music and any failure behavior, which an agent must guess.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single 'query' parameter. The two inline examples do add real meaning about expected input format (free-form natural language music requests), but nothing is said about language handling, ambiguity, or whether the 'play' prefix is required.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Resolve a natural language music query') and the outcome ('to stream metadata'), which is clear on its own. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling play_music, leaving the resolve-vs-play boundary to inference.

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?

Usage is only implied through the two example queries ('play spb songs hindi', 'play lofi'), which show what kinds of input fit. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to play_music as the follow-up or alternative action.

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