get_user_playlists_by_id

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 meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: pagination behavior, output capping by max_results, and the deprecation/unavailability caveat. It does not describe return format, but the response_format parameter partially covers that.

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 sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, followed by the deprecation caveat and the output cap. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple read-only list tool with full schema coverage and a response_format parameter, the description is nearly complete. It covers pagination, output capping, and the critical deprecation limitation. It does not describe the exact return structure, but no output schema exists and the response_format enum gives the agent the key options.

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 documents all five parameters. The description adds a small amount of value by clarifying that output is capped by max_results and mentioning the SPOTIFY_MCP_MAX_ITEMS default, but this largely duplicates the schema's max_results description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List another Spotify user's public playlists (paginated).' It clearly distinguishes this tool from get_user_playlists by emphasizing 'another user's' and 'public,' and it adds a concrete deprecation caveat that further defines what the tool is.

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 description gives clear context: this is for another user's public playlists, not your own. It also provides an explicit exclusion: unavailable for newer app registrations after Spotify's February 2026 Web API changes. It does not name an alternative tool, but the context is strong enough to guide selection.

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