sonos_browse_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states the action and example but omits critical details: whether this is a read-only operation, permissions required, effect of required parameters (like deviceId and objectId), or behavior when no children exist. The description is insufficient for full behavioral understanding.

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 two sentences long, concise, and front-loaded with the action and purpose. Every word adds value without redundancy. The example immediately clarifies the use case.

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 that the tool has 4 documented parameters but no output schema, the description adequately explains the primary use case and provides examples. Minor gaps exist around return value structure and pagination behavior, but overall it is sufficient for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a clear description in the schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning or usage context for the parameters beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'browse' and the resource 'specific library item' with the goal to get its children, and provides concrete examples (albums for an artist, tracks for an album). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like sonos_browse_artists or sonos_browse_albums by being more general.

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 description includes explicit examples of when to use this tool (e.g., getting albums for an artist). However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives like the more specific browse tools among siblings. The clarity of context is high, but it lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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