list_user_playlists

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses the return shape (data/error/successful), the implicit mine=true behavior, and parameter defaults. It doesn't mention authentication requirements or rate limits, but it covers the key behavioral traits.

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 well-organized with a one-line summary, an Args list, and a Returns section. Each sentence provides necessary information without waste.

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?

All necessary details for invoking the tool are present: purpose, scope, parameter semantics, and return value structure. Simple read operation with no side effects, so no additional behavioral caveats are needed.

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% (parameter descriptions are absent), and the description fully compensates by explaining max_results range/default, page_token purpose, and part accepted values/default. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 action ('Retrieves playlists owned by the authenticated user') with a specific resource and scope. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_user_subscriptions or get_channel_activities.

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?

It implies usage for the authenticated user's own playlists via 'implicitly using mine=true', but does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not to use. Provides clear context, no exclusions.

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