media_control

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

No annotations exist, so description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the action without disclosing side effects (e.g., if it spawns a new process), required permissions, or error conditions. For a control tool, more transparency is needed.

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 sentence, no wasted words. However, the '[ACTION]' prefix is ambiguous and could be removed. Overall efficient but slightly unclear formatting.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and parameter values. Lacks context on scope (e.g., system-wide vs per-app) and edge cases. Adequate but not thorough.

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 describes 'action' as a string with no enum values (0% schema description coverage). The description compensates by listing exact allowed values: play/pause/play-pause/next/previous/stop. This adds significant meaning 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?

The description clearly states the tool controls playback with specific actions: play, pause, play-pause, next, previous, stop. It distinguishes from sibling 'get_now_playing' which only retrieves current track. The verb 'control' and resource 'playback' are precise.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'get_now_playing' or other media tools. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., running media player) or context.

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