Discogs: get label

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the readOnlyHint annotation already provides. It does not disclose what fields are included in the profile details, whether authentication is required, what happens for invalid IDs, or any rate-limiting considerations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action and resource, making it immediately scannable.

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 one-parameter read-only tool, the description is adequate but lacks nuance. It does not mention what the response contains beyond 'profile details', nor does it address error cases or any special behavior. Given the absence of an output schema, a bit more detail would improve completeness.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, leaving the description to compensate. It clarifies that label_id is a Discogs label ID, which adds meaning beyond the bare integer type. However, it does not explain the expected format (e.g., numeric string vs integer) or any range constraints, so compensation is partial.

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 action (Fetch), the resource (profile details for a record label), and the identifying mechanism (by Discogs label ID). This distinctly separates it from siblings like discogs_get_label_releases and discogs_search, which have different purposes.

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 is provided on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. It does not mention that this is for profile metadata only, whereas discogs_get_label_releases would be used for the label's releases, nor does it indicate any prerequisites or exclusions.

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