snapshot_removed_tracks

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. The verb 'List' conveys a read-only operation, and the older/newer framing clarifies directionality. However, it adds no detail on side effects (e.g., does not modify snapshots or playlists), output shape, ordering, or edge cases such as identical snapshots.

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?

One short sentence that front-loads the action and scope. Every word contributes; there is no repetition of schema content, no filler, and no buried caveats.

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 tool in a dense family of snapshot-diff siblings, the description is minimal. The schema covers parameters well and there is no output schema to document, but the description omits explicit routing among snapshot_new_tracks, find_lost_since_snapshot, and diff_playlist_snapshots, and never confirms the operation is read-only. It is functional but leaves real disambiguation to the agent.

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 coverage is 100% — every parameter (from_snapshot, to_snapshot, max_results, response_format) already has a description, so the baseline is 3. The tool description's 'older and a newer' framing merely reinforces what the parameter descriptions already state. It adds no format or semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 ('List') and a precise scope: tracks removed between an older and a newer snapshot. The word 'only' signals a filtered view rather than a full diff, which helps separate it from full-diff siblings. It does not, however, name the closest alternatives (e.g., snapshot_new_tracks, find_lost_since_snapshot), leaving some sibling disambiguation to the agent.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. Usage is only implied by the directional phrase 'removed between an older and a newer snapshot,' which suggests this is the tool for removed-track-only diffs. Siblings like snapshot_new_tracks or diff_playlist_snapshots are never mentioned as alternatives.

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