follow_playlist

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

With only destructiveHint: false in annotations, the description adds genuinely useful behavior: dry_run defaults to true, real writes require confirmation unless SPOTIFY_MCP_CONFIRM=never, and the underlying endpoint. It does not contradict the non-destructive hint, though it omits mention of auth scopes or rate limits.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and endpoint, followed by the rationale and safety gating. No wasted words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Endpoint, safety mode, confirmation policy, and API-version context are all covered, leaving nothing an agent needs missing.

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% and every parameter (including the public caveat and dry_run meaning) is already documented in the schema. The description reinforces dry_run's default but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Follow a playlist') plus the precise mechanism (PUT /me/library). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like unfollow_playlist and check_playlist_following.

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?

Explains why this tool is now the only path to follow a playlist (endpoints removed Feb 2026) and notes dry_run defaults to true while writes need confirmation. No explicit when-not-to-use or sibling alternative is named, though the alternatives are largely gone by construction.

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