sonos_add_to_queue

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action but does not explain side effects (e.g., whether it starts playback, if position/playNext parameters modify queue behavior, or error conditions). The supported URI types are mentioned but not comprehensively.

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?

Two concise sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds relevant detail. Every word is earned.

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 tool's 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not cover return values, error handling, or behavioral nuances like queue manipulation details or device prerequisites.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds minor context (supports music library and streaming service URIs, optional metadata in DIDL-Lite XML) beyond schema descriptions, but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding.

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 verb (Add) and resource (track URI to playback queue), and specifies support for music library and streaming service URIs. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sonos_play_from_queue, but the name and context make the purpose clear.

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 versus alternatives such as sonos_play or sonos_play_from_queue. The description does not mention prerequisites, preferred scenarios, or exclusions.

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