get_artist_genres

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries some burden. It communicates that this is a read-only, narrowed view of the artist endpoint, but it does not disclose return shape, empty-genre behavior, or any other behavioral details. Still, for a simple getter, the description is reasonably transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and the endpoint relationship with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's low complexity.

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?

Given the small parameter count and complete schema descriptions, the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly. There is no output schema, but 'genres' plus the endpoint reference makes the expected return understandable for this simple focused getter.

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 schema already explains both artist_id and response_format with meaningful detail. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, which is acceptable given the schema carries the full burden.

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 has a specific verb and resource ('Get genres for an artist') and explicitly notes it is a 'focused view of GET /artists/{id}', separating it from broader artist tools like get_artist. An agent can immediately understand what this tool returns without opening the schema.

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 'focused view' phrasing gives clear context that this tool is for genre-only lookups rather than full artist details. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it, but the intent is clear from the description.

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