search_song

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'search' without explicitly mentioning that the operation is read-only, what the return format looks like, or any rate limits/pagination behavior. The word 'search' implies a read-only action, but that is implicit rather than disclosed.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately concise, though it could benefit from a bit more behavioral context without becoming verbose.

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 detailed input schema and existing output schema, the description is sufficient to convey the core search function. It lacks explicit usage guidance, but the context and schema fill most gaps, making it adequate for a straightforward search tool.

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 detailed descriptions for query, limit, market, and offset. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond restating the 'query string' concept, so the baseline of 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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'Spotify tracks' with a qualifier 'matching a query string'. This distinguishes it from playback control siblings like play, pause, and skip, which have entirely different functions.

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 implies the tool is for finding tracks, which is clear in context with the sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous enough that no exclusions are needed.

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