Leer pista por GUID

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this by saying 'Lee' (reads). It adds an important behavioral constraint: 'exige que el proyecto activo no haya cambiado' (requires the active project not to have changed), which is not captured by the annotations. This helps the agent anticipate a potential failure condition.

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 includes a necessary precondition. No redundant phrases.

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 has an output schema and readOnly annotation, the description covers the core purpose and the key caveat about project stability. It is sufficient for an agent to understand when and how to invoke it.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining the role of track_guid (the GUID used to read the track) and project_ref (linked to verifying the active project hasn't changed). It provides meaning beyond the bare schema properties.

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 'Lee una pista por GUID' (reads a track by GUID), providing a specific verb and resource. It also adds a distinguishing condition about requiring the active project to be unchanged, which helps set it apart from sibling tools that modify track state.

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 provides clear context for use: reading a track by GUID with a precondition on the active project. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it doesn't fully meet the highest bar.

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