Discogs: get master release

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, and the description's 'Fetch details' is consistent. It adds context by clarifying that a master release is an abstract grouping, which is useful. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral details such as response format or potential limitations, so it adds only modest value beyond the annotation.

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, tightly worded sentence that immediately states the core purpose. The parenthetical adds essential context without unnecessary verbosity, making it highly efficient.

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 single-parameter read-only tool, the description gives enough to understand the basic operation, but it lacks any information about return values or how this interacts with related tools. The lack of an output schema and minimal sibling differentiation makes the description adequate but not comprehensive.

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 one parameter (master_id, integer, required) with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not mention or explain this parameter, relying on the parameter name and tool title for inference. Given the low schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not, leaving the parameter semantics shallow.

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 details') and the resource ('a master release'), with a clarifying definition ('the abstract release grouping all its pressings/versions'). This distinguishes it from related tools like discogs_get_release, which fetches a specific release rather than the master grouping.

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 definition of a master release implies when this tool should be used (when you need the abstract grouping rather than an individual pressing), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs. alternatives like discogs_get_release or discogs_get_master_versions. Usage context is present but not fully elaborated.

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