abrir_soundcloud

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

Annotations already declare openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that the action happens in the local default browser rather than returning data, but it omits whether a SoundCloud session/login is required and what the call returns on success or failure.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, front-loading the action and resource, with the URL parenthetical as a compact disambiguator. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 zero-parameter browser-launch tool with annotations covering safety and open-world behavior, the definition is nearly complete. The only real gap is the unstated prerequisite of an authenticated SoundCloud session and any failure behavior if no browser is available.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a no-parameter tool applies. The description correctly implies no input is needed to perform the action.

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 ("Abre"), a specific resource (SoundCloud likes at soundcloud.com/you/likes), and the execution target (default PC browser). An agent can distinguish it from siblings like abrir_ypt or controle_midia from the resource alone, though the description never names those alternatives explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the agent can infer this is the tool for showing a user their SoundCloud likes in a browser. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer it over controle_midia or abrir_ypt, and no preconditions (e.g., being logged in) are mentioned.

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