export_all_playlists

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

The description discloses quota behavior (GET /me/playlists + N×GET /playlists/{id}/items) and the cap by 'fetchAllCap.' This is valuable beyond annotations, which are absent. It doesn't clarify if this is read-only or whether it modifies anything, but the sidecar-file output is implied. A strong but not complete disclosure.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and then a useful quota note. The line about 'fetchAllCap' is slightly jargon-heavy without explanation, but the description remains compact and mostly efficient.

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?

No annotations and no output schema, so the description carries the burden. It covers purpose and quota, but leaves gaps: what is a sidecar file, what does 'all' include (followed vs owned), what is 'fetchAllCap', and what is returned. For a bulk export tool with 5 params, this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning to 'scope' by clarifying 'owned = only playlists you own', and it hints at 'fetchAllCap' behavior. It doesn't elaborate much on output_dir or response_format, but given full schema coverage, the added scope nuance pushes it to a 4.

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 ('Export every owned (or all) playlist') with resource and output format. It distinguishes scope options ('owned' vs 'all') and mentions metadata + items to a sidecar file. This differentiates it from sibling export tools like export_playlist_json or export_playlist_markdown.

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 it: bulk export of all owned playlists. The quota note also gives scale expectations. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives for single-playlist export or say when NOT to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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