Get track comments

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: the results are ordered newest first, and each comment includes a track timestamp. This is meaningful extra context for an agent.

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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core action ('List comments on a track') before adding the ordering and timestamp details. Every phrase contributes useful information.

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 read-only list tool with only one required parameter and full schema coverage, the description is quite complete. It covers ordering and a key output detail. The only small gap is that it does not mention pagination behavior or point to 'soundcloud_next_page', even though 'limit' exists in the schema.

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 100%; both 'track' and 'limit' already have clear descriptions in the schema, including type, constraints, and defaults. The tool description does not need to compensate. It adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List comments on a track'. It also adds distinguishing behavior by stating ordering ('newest first') and the key returned data (timestamp in the track). This makes it easy to tell apart from the write-oriented sibling 'soundcloud_comment_on_track'.

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 usage context is clearly implied: use this when you need to read comments for a track. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as 'soundcloud_comment_on_track' or pagination via 'soundcloud_next_page', leaving some guidance to inference.

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