get_artist_discography

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it only discloses that this maps to a GET endpoint (read-only). It does not mention pagination behavior, max_results caps, response_format modes, or the alias relationship between album_types and include_groups, all of which are material behavioral traits for a tool this size.

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?

A single 13-word sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then packs the endpoint and filtering scope into a parenthetical. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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 an 8-parameter tool with zero annotations and no output schema, this description is too thin. Core selection and behavioral gaps remain: why use this over get_artist_albums, what the return shape roughly looks like, and how filtering defaults behave. The rich schema saves it from a 1, but an agent still cannot confidently route to it among the discography-focused siblings.

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% and each parameter already has meaning, defaults, and enums documented, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the endpoint mapping and filtering intent; it does not clarify the album_types/include_groups alias beyond what the schema already states.

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 ('Get'), a clear resource ('discography for an artist'), and adds scope via 'filtered' and 'album-type filtering', plus the underlying endpoint. This distinguishes it from broad album fetchers like get_artist_albums, though it never names a sibling explicitly, and in a list this crowded explicit differentiation would help.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to choose this tool over the many overlapping discography siblings (get_artist_albums, get_artist_singles, get_artist_appearances, artist_discography_explorer, artist_release_type_breakdown). No conditions, exclusions, or alternative routes are mentioned, leaving selection entirely to the agent's inference.

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