resolve_music

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool 'returns ranked results' and explains the ranking criteria: 'trust × price × availability, never by commission.' It does not cover errors, rate limits, or authentication, but for a read-only lookup tool the disclosed ranking behavior is substantive.

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 three sentences with no filler: purpose, result coverage, usage trigger, and ranking behavior are all stated efficiently. It is front-loaded with the core action and each subsequent sentence adds distinct value.

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 tool has one required parameter, and the schema thoroughly documents its format and edge cases. The description covers scope, ranking behavior, and when to use it, with no output schema requiring explanation of return values. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 fully documents the single 'slug' parameter, including format, non-Latin scripts, accent folding, and percent-encoding guidance. The description adds no parameter-specific detail, so it stays at the baseline for a fully documented 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Find where to stream, buy, or collect a song or album.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like resolve_artist, resolve_game, find_product, and discover_music by defining the music-lookup scope and the categories of results (streaming, purchase, physical media).

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 provides an explicit trigger: 'Use when a user asks about music — whether they want to listen, own digitally, or find a collector edition.' It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the usage context is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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