Search playlists

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context by stating tracks are omitted by default 'to keep results small' and that 'show_tracks' changes this behavior. This exceeds what annotations alone convey without contradicting them.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the key behavioral caveat about tracks is included succinctly.

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?

Given the rich annotations and fully documented schema, the description covers the main behavioral nuance that would affect an agent's invocation: track omission and how to include tracks. No output schema exists, but the description adequately supports correct use for a search tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 'show_tracks' parameter's effect and rationale, adding meaning beyond the schema's default-value note, but it does not substantially explain other parameters because they are already well documented.

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 and resource: 'Full-text search for playlists / albums.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by focusing on playlists/albums and mentioning that tracks are omitted by default, which clarifies its scope relative to track search.

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 indicates when to use this tool: for full-text search of playlists or albums. It also instructs setting 'show_tracks' to include tracks, giving concrete usage guidance. It does not explicitly name alternatives like search_tracks or search_users, but the resource distinction is sufficient.

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