get_recently_played

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get recently played tracks with timestamps,' implying a read operation but gives no information about pagination, ordering, authentication, rate limits, or what the response contains. For a read tool with no annotation safety net, this is insufficient.

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?

The description is one short sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the purpose and avoids repetition of schema details. It's appropriately sized, though arguably too terse to cover more context.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should convey what the tool returns. It says 'tracks with timestamps' but doesn't clarify whether the result is a list, its ordering (e.g., most recent first), or how pagination works beyond the limit parameter. The absence of such detail makes it incomplete for an agent to confidently use the tool.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (after, limit, before). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The schema already explains the meaning and defaults adequately.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('recently played tracks') and adds the detail 'with timestamps.' This distinguishes it from current-play tools like get_now_playing and get_currently_playing, though it doesn't explicitly name those siblings. The intent is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_now_playing or get_currently_playing. The name implies historical plays, but the description doesn't state that or offer any exclusions. An agent must infer usage from the name or sibling context.

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