Resolve a MusicBrainz URL to its entity

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint. The description adds 'Read-only' and credits MusicBrainz data source, reinforcing the annotations but not adding new behavioral details like rate limits or auth.

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, front-loading the main purpose and adding usage tip with attribution. Every sentence earns its place, no redundancy.

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 tool with good annotations, the description covers URL format, `inc` parameter, and example. No output schema exists, but 'entity' implies a full object. Minor gap: no explicit mention of return format.

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%. The description adds context: `url` can be a full URL or 'entity/mbid' path, and `inc` includes linked sub-entities. This goes beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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 it resolves a MusicBrainz URL to its entity by extracting type and MBID. It distinguishes from siblings like musicbrainz_lookup or musicbrainz_search by explicitly focusing on URL input.

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 says 'Handy when a user pastes a MusicBrainz link,' providing clear context. It also mentions using `inc` for sub-entities. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like musicbrainz_lookup for direct MBIDs.

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