playlists_trigger_previous

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While 'trigger' implies an action that changes state, the description doesn't clarify what 'previous item' means (e.g., does it move playback position, restart the previous item, or something else?), what happens if there's no previous item, or whether this requires specific permissions. Important behavioral aspects are missing.

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, efficient sentence that states the core functionality without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple action with one parameter and gets straight to the point.

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?

For a tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks behavioral details (especially important with no annotations) and usage context relative to many similar sibling tools. The agent would need to guess about the tool's exact behavior and appropriate use cases.

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 description coverage is 100% (the single parameter 'playlistId' is well-described in the schema), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, but doesn't need to compensate for gaps.

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 ('trigger the previous item') and target resource ('in a specific playlist'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from similar sibling tools like 'playlists_trigger_focused_previous' or 'audio_trigger_active_previous', which limits its differentiation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With numerous sibling tools for triggering previous items in different contexts (announcement, audio, playlist-focused, etc.), the agent receives no help in selecting the appropriate tool for a given scenario.

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