List playlists

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that playlists are listed 'with their sounds', which is useful behavioral context, though it mostly overlaps with the schema parameter description rather than revealing hidden behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the use cases are presented concisely.

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 simple read-only listing tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the purpose, the main use cases, and the key return detail (sounds). It is slightly light on output format details, but that is not a major gap for this 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%, so the one parameter is already well documented. The description's phrase 'with their sounds' provides light context for the default includeSounds behavior, but it does not add substantial meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('playlists in the world with their sounds'), making the operation immediately clear. It also differentiates the tool from sibling listing tools by focusing on playlists and sound-name lookup.

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 explicit use cases: finding the exact playlist/sound name before linking to a scene, and verifying a playlist existence referenced by a journal. It does not name specific alternative tools, but the contextual scenarios are clear enough to guide selection.

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