Remove tracks from playlist

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

Beyond the annotations, which already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false), the description adds meaningful behavioral context: only the user's own playlists are affected and the order of remaining tracks is preserved. It does not detail edge cases like duplicate tracks or failures, but it covers the key operation semantics.

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 focused sentence with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the ownership constraint plus order-preservation detail follow immediately. Every element 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 moderately simple mutation tool with fully described parameters, no output schema, and annotations covering read-only/idempotent/destructive hints, the description is sufficiently complete. It gives the core semantics, the ownership requirement, and the order-preservation guarantee, which is enough for correct tool selection and invocation.

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%, so the input schema fully documents all three parameters including the optional account parameter. The description itself does not add parameter-level detail beyond restating the general removal intent, so it does not exceed the baseline.

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 a specific action ('Remove the given tracks'), a specific resource ('a playlist owned by the logged-in user'), and a behavioral guarantee ('keeping the order of the rest'). It is easy to distinguish from sibling tools like soundcloud_add_playlist_tracks, soundcloud_update_playlist, and soundcloud_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 provides clear context by restricting use to playlists owned by the logged-in user, which sets an important precondition. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion scenarios, but the action is specific enough that an agent can infer when to choose it.

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