add_to_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states the core action but omits critical behavioral traits: whether an active device is required, whether playback is affected, what the response looks like, or error conditions. For a mutation tool, this level of detail is insufficient.

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 zero filler. The verb, object, and scope are all present, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks usage guidance, behavioral transparency (e.g., device requirements), and doesn't explain the role of device_id. Given sibling tools and the need to decide when to use it, the description is incomplete.

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 input schema already covers both parameters with descriptions, achieving 100% schema coverage. The tool description adds little beyond that—it merely restates that tracks or episodes are accepted. It does not clarify when device_id is needed or that it is optional (since only uri is required), so no meaningful semantic value is added.

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 uses a clear verb 'Add' with a specific resource ('track or episode') and a precise destination ('end of the playback queue'). It unambiguously distinguishes this from adding to a playlist (add_to_playlist) and from queue inspection (get_queue), leaving no doubt about the tool's function.

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 clearly conveys the action but offers no explicit guidance on when to select this tool over alternatives like play_from_search or add_to_playlist. It doesn't state exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., 'use this to queue without interrupting current playback'), leaving the decision to inference rather than direct instruction.

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