find_empty_playlists

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

The description is truthful and the verb 'find' implies a read-only operation, but with no annotations, it doesn't explicitly disclose side effects or prerequisites. However, the operation is inherently non-destructive and the description aligns with the tool name, so it is acceptable but lacks extra detail.

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 that front-loads the action and resource. It contains no filler or redundancy, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple and an output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the description does not address the optional db_path parameter or provide any usage context, leaving some gaps for an agent to fill.

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 schema has one parameter, db_path, with 0% description coverage. The description does not mention the parameter at all, leaving the agent to infer its meaning from the name. No compensation is provided for the missing schema documentation.

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 'Find playlists with 0 videos' uses a specific verb and resource with a clear condition. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_playlists (which lists all playlists) and find_duplicates, 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools such as list_playlists and curation_report exist, but no comparison or recommended context is provided.

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