netease_list_playlists

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

Annotations already provide readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive guarantees. The description goes beyond them by disclosing additional behavioral traits: no mouse/focus/navigation side effects and omission of account identifiers. This is valuable context for an agent controlling a desktop client.

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?

Three short sentences, each with a distinct purpose: scope/action, UI safety guarantee, and parameter omission. The key action is front-loaded and there is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 no-parameter tool with rich annotations, an output schema, and a precise scope statement, the description covers operation, side-effect behavior, and input context. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing, and the output schema covers return-value details.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds meaning by explaining that account identifiers are omitted, which clarifies why no parameters are required and prevents the agent from attempting to pass an account ID.

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?

States the specific verb 'Refresh' and a concrete resource ('owned, collected and system playlists') within the desktop client. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling mutation tools like netease_create_playlist and netease_delete_playlist.

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 gives clear context by positioning this as the playlist-refresh operation and explicitly states it does not move the mouse, focus, or navigate, so it is safe to invoke without disrupting the UI. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool covers the same list-refresh purpose, making the intended use unambiguous.

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