netease_skip_track

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

The description discloses meaningful behavior beyond the annotations: it performs a single skip, verifies a visible song label, reports unchanged labels as unverified, and explicitly prohibits automatic retries. These details are not captured by readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, or destructiveHint.

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 sentences, no filler, and the main action is front-loaded. The second sentence adds a critical edge-case instruction without bloating the description.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers the action, the verification expectation, the failure/edge-case reporting behavior, and the retry policy. Nothing essential is missing.

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 input schema has one enum parameter, 'direction', with no property descriptions. The description compensates by linking the direction values to the effect ('Move to next/previous track once'), giving the agent enough semantic grounding to select 'next' or 'previous' correctly.

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 states a specific action ('Move to next/previous track once') and a clear resource ('track'), with an additional verification behavior that distinguishes it from broader playback tools like netease_set_playback. It is immediately obvious what the tool does and how it differs from siblings.

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 operational guidance: perform the skip exactly once, verify the label change, treat unchanged labels as unverified, and do not retry. It lacks an explicit comparison to alternatives such as netease_set_playback, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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