artist_discography_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool performs a 'paginated /artists/{id}/albums walk' and communicates quota cost with a yellow indicator. This is useful behavioral context, though it does not explicitly state read-only semantics or result truncation 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?

The description is two sentences with no filler: the first front-loads the purpose and use case, the second adds quota/endpoint context. Every clause earns its place.

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 five parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete: parameters are covered by the schema, and the quota/endpoint note fills an important operational gap. It could be stronger by describing result shape or how max_results affects output, but the response_format parameter mitigates this.

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 high at 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds helpful examples of what query should match ('live album, deluxe edition or collaboration'), but it does not add semantic value for max_results or clarify behavior beyond what the schema provides.

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 and resource: 'Full-text filter over an artist's release titles'. It also differentiates itself from sibling browse tools like get_artist_discography by framing the tool as a way to find specific albums 'without scrolling the whole catalog'.

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 clearly communicates when to use the tool: when you are looking for a particular release by title keyword within an artist's catalog. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the use case is evident and well-scoped.

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