get_playlist_added_dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context with the pagination and quota note ('GET /playlists/{id}/items paged'), but does not say how paging interacts with max_results or what the result shape looks like.

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 compact sentences with no filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded before the quota note. The 'Quota:' fragment is terse to the point of being slightly cryptic.

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 read-only listing tool with no output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers what is returned and how it is fetched. It does not explain result ordering defaults or paging limits, but nothing critical to a correct call is 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 description coverage is 100%, with sort, max_results, playlist_id and response_format all documented including defaults and enums, so the schema carries the load. The description adds no parameter syntax or format detail beyond the output fields it mentions.

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 ('List when each track was added to a playlist') plus the fields returned (added_at, added_by), so the agent knows this is an added-date listing rather than a plain item listing. It stops short of explicitly naming the close sibling get_playlist_items, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiated.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance, despite several near-neighbors (get_playlist_items, get_playlist, search_within_playlist). Usage is only inferable from the phrase 'when each track was added'.

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