get_artist_albums

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail about include_groups, including the comma-separated format and the 'omit for all' default, and it does not contradict the annotations.

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 compact sentence with no filler, and the important filter semantics are front-loaded. It is slightly telegraphic, stating the resource as a noun phrase rather than a clear verb phrase, but it remains highly concise.

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?

Given the low complexity, the readOnlyHint annotation, and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient for correct invocation. The main gap is the absence of any tool-selection or alternative guidance, which is already penalized under usage_guidelines.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully documents include_groups with allowed values and default behavior, but artist_id, limit, and offset are left entirely to their names and schema defaults.

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 identifies the resource clearly ('An artist's albums') and the operation is inferable from the tool name. It does not explicitly use a verb like 'retrieve' or contrast with siblings such as get_saved_albums or get_album_tracks, so it is clear but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_saved_albums, search_catalog, or get_album_tracks. The only usage-related content is the include_groups filter, which is parameter behavior rather than tool-selection guidance.

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