Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• SpotifyGetInfoC
  2.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided. The description does not disclose side effects, permissions, or error behavior. The schema description for item_uri hints at different behavior for artist vs. album/playlist, but the description itself adds no behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness3/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise (one sentence) but lacks important details about output or usage. It is not overly verbose, but it sacrifices completeness for brevity.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  No output schema exists, yet the description does not elaborate on what 'detailed info' includes. The schema partially fills this gap for item_uri, but the description itself is insufficient for the tool's complexity.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds little beyond the schema: 'Spotify item (track, album, artist, or playlist)'. The schema already describes item_uri as a URI and outlines type-specific behavior. The addition is minimal.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed info about a Spotify item and lists the item types (track, album, artist, playlist). It distinguishes from siblings like SpotifySearch (searching) and SpotifyLibrary (library management) by focusing on getting details by URI.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. No mention of prerequisites like needing a valid URI or when to prefer other tools for different operations (e.g., SpotifySearch for finding items).

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

• SpotifySearchC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Search for...' but does not mention that the operation is read-only, what data is returned, pagination, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that directly states the purpose. It is as concise as possible, though it could benefit from front-loading the most critical information. Every word is used efficiently.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, error scenarios, or authentication requirements, leaving an agent with insufficient context for reliable invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The input schema has full description coverage: each parameter is documented. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Thus the baseline of 3 applies.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action (search) and the resources (tracks, albums, artists, playlists) which distinguishes it from sibling tools like SpotifyGetInfo. However, it is very brief and does not elaborate on the scope or types of search, lacking the specificity of high-scoring examples.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use SpotifyPlaylist instead). There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context for use.

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

• SpotifyLibraryB
  3.2/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits like authentication, rate limits, or mutability. It only says 'manage' without detailing that save/remove are write operations. Minimal transparency.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely short and front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence adds value with zero waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  No output schema and incomplete behavioral context. Does not explain what get_liked returns or what save/remove return. Lacks completeness for a tool without annotations or output schema.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema descriptions cover all parameters (100%) and are clear. The tool description adds no extra value beyond summarizing the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it manages saved (liked) tracks and lists the actions. It implicitly differentiates from sibling tools (playlist, search, etc.) but does not explicitly differentiate.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description lists available actions but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like SpotifySearch or SpotifyPlaylist. Usage is inferred from context.

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

• SpotifyQueueB
  3.4/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions basic actions (get/add) without disclosing side effects, permissions, rate limits, or return behavior. This is minimal disclosure.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose without any extraneous words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema and lacking annotations, the description should cover expected return for 'get', error cases, and any limits. It only states the actions, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, and the schema already describes both parameters sufficiently (action as 'add' or 'get', track_id for add). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool manages the playback queue with two specific actions: get or add a track. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like SpotifyPlayback (playback control) and SpotifyPlaylist (playlist management).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for getting queue or adding a track but does not provide explicit when to use vs. alternatives or any prerequisites. No guidance on exclusion conditions.

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

• SpotifyPlaybackA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations are provided, but the description does not disclose side effects (e.g., pausing interrupts playback), prerequisites (e.g., active device), or error conditions. It only describes what each action does without deeper behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is concise with bullet points for actions, but it repeats the same information in the first paragraph and the schema's description field. It is mostly efficient but could be more streamlined.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description covers all actions and basic parameter usage, but lacks mention of prerequisites or error handling. For a tool with multiple actions and no output schema, it provides adequate but not deep completeness.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, and the tool description repeats parameter info (e.g., 'seek: jump to position_ms'). The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool manages playback with specific actions (get, start, pause, skip, previous, seek, volume), distinguishing it from siblings like SpotifyGetInfo and SpotifyQueue. Each action is briefly explained.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides context for when to use each action (e.g., 'start: play spotify_uri, or resume if omitted'). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives like SpotifyQueue for queue management.

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

• SpotifyPlaylistA
  4.1/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does clarify the delete nuance (unfollow vs hard delete). However, it omits details on authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects of other actions (e.g., adding tracks may have ownership/duplicate implications).

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise, using a bullet list to present actions. It is front-loaded with the overall purpose and each sentence earns its place. Zero waste.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, multiple actions) and lack of output schema, the description covers the main operations but does not specify return values or error behavior. An AI agent might need more detail on what each action returns (e.g., list returns playlist objects) for proper invocation.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by relating parameters to specific actions (e.g., name required for create, track_ids for add/remove). This contextual grouping enhances understanding beyond the schema's per-parameter descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool manages playlists and lists five specific actions (list, create, add_tracks, remove_tracks, delete) with brief explanations. This provides a specific verb-resource mapping and distinguishes the tool from siblings by its focus on playlist operations.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides clear context for each action, including required parameters (e.g., name for create, playlist_id for delete). It notes that delete unfollows rather than permanently removes. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare with alternatives like SpotifySearch for finding tracks.

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