export_playlist_markdown

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears the full disclosure burden. The phrase '1 read' adds real behavioral context by signaling read-only behavior and API cost. But it does not address error behavior, truncation/pagination beyond max_results or explicitly confirm absense of side effects, so richer disclosure would be warranted.

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 short sentences with no filler, purpose front-loaded, sibling differentiation included, and the behavioral hint ('1 read') kept terse. Every word 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 4-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage, defaults documented, and a clear output format stated, an agent has what it needs to call the tool correctly. The main gaps are a missing output schema and no explicit guidance on when markdown is preferred over the JSON variant, but these are minor.

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%, with all four parameters documented including defaults and enum meaning. The description adds no parameter-level meaning itself, so the baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb (Export), a specific resource (one playlist), and a concrete output format (paste-ready markdown table). It explicitly names the sibling export_playlist and positions itself as the doc-friendly variant, so an agent can distinguish it from export_playlist and export_playlist_json immediately.

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 identifies export_playlist as the alternative and gives the selecting condition: this is the doc-friendly markdown variant. This gives clear context within the export family. However, it does not spell out when-not-to-use or contrast explicitly with export_playlist_json, leaving a small inference gap.

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