search_artists

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and it does add useful details: the exact endpoint and a quota indicator (' single'). Yet it omits other behavioral context like read-only status, pagination behavior, or response shape, leaving the agent to infer these from the endpoint and schema.

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 short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Both pieces of information — purpose and quota — are immediately actionable.

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?

The schema thoroughly covers parameters, but there is no output schema and the description does not clarify what the search returns or how response_format behaves. Adequate for a simple search tool, yet a brief note on return values would make it fully complete.

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?

All 7 parameters are already fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the fixed type=artist implied by the endpoint.

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 ('Search'), resource ('artists'), and scope ('only'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling search tools. The endpoint 'GET /search?type=artist' reinforces the exact operation.

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 phrase 'artists only' implies the tool is for artist-specific lookups, giving some exclusion context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like search_tracks/search_albums or state when to prefer this over the generic 'search' tool.

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