Fetch next page

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds a concrete behavioral constraint beyond the annotations: only api.soundcloud.com URLs are accepted. It does not describe error handling for invalid URLs, but at this simplicity the added constraint is sufficient context.

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 compact sentences with no filler. The core action and the critical domain constraint are both front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter, read-only, idempotent helper with strong annotations, the description is adequate. It explains what is fetched, where the value comes from, and what kinds of URLs are allowed. Optional details like repeated pagination behavior or error response shapes are not essential here.

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 already defines next_href as 'the next_href value from a previous result'. The description reinforces this and adds the meaningful api.soundcloud.com URL restriction, giving the agent extra precision about acceptable parameter values.

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 ('Fetch') and clearly identifies the resource ('next page of any paginated result') and the mechanism (next_href from a previous tool call). This distinguishes it from the resource-specific siblings and makes its generic role obvious.

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 clearly states when to use it: after a previous paginated result, passing the returned next_href. It also imposes a domain restriction (only api.soundcloud.com URLs are accepted). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like soundcloud_api_request or state when not to use it.

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