decade_sampler_plan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it does so well: it declares the operation read-only, explains the deterministic selection algorithm, specifies the tiebreak rule, and documents the API quota impact. This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and cost.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core read-only sampling purpose stated first, followed by the algorithm, tiebreak, and quota. Every sentence adds useful information and there is no filler.

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 read-only planning tool, the description adequately covers purpose, selection behavior, determinism, tiebreak, and quota. It does not explicitly describe the output shape, but the response_format parameter schema partially covers this, and the tool's read-only nature reduces the need for extensive safety warnings.

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 parameters are already well documented with defaults, ranges, and enum values. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action: a read-only sampling plan that groups saved albums by release decade and deterministically picks evenly spaced representatives. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like artist_era_sampler, saved_tracks_roulette, and saved_albums_by_decade.

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 implies when to use the tool — when a deterministic, decade-balanced sample of saved albums is needed — but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. No exclusionary guidance is given, so the usage context is inferred rather than prescribed.

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