Get KBK Track Details

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 discloses what details are returned (play count, votes, stream URL) and implies a read-only operation through 'Full details', but does not explicitly state safety, auth requirements, or error behavior. This is a minimal but acceptable disclosure for a simple getter.

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 entire description is a single sentence that front-loads the core purpose and enumerates key content. It is concise, well-structured, and contains no filler or redundant information.

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's low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent what details are included and the parameter schema explains the ID source. It lacks only an explicit statement about read-only behavior, but that is partially addressed in other dimensions.

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 100%, with the 'id' parameter already documented as coming from search_tracks/now_playing. The description adds only the notion of 'one track by its id', which does not significantly enrich meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: retrieving full details for a single track by ID. It lists specific content (play count, votes, stream URL) and distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_tracks (search) and get_now_playing (current track) by emphasizing 'one track by its id'.

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 clear context that this is for retrieving details when a track ID is known, and the parameter description reinforces that the ID comes from search_tracks/now_playing. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is well implied.

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