vibo_add_song_to_section

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

The description discloses meaningful behaviors beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation: it is confirm-gated and returns a preview without confirm=true, warns about likely-not-original results contaminating a live DJ set, and directs not to add a best guess. This is substantial operational context not present in annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and each additional sentence adds essential context: source of the song, quality-confidence caveat, fallback behavior, and confirmation requirement. No filler or repetition.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description covers the workflow, parameter provenance, safety (confirm gate and quality check), and failure behavior (report matches). This is comprehensive for a mutation tool integrated with search.

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 71%, and the description adds key parameter semantics: songUrl is required and sourced from vibo_search_songs, viboSongId/title/artist should be included when known, and confirm must be true to proceed. It does not elaborate on title/artist beyond inclusion, but overall it meaningfully supplements the schema.

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 opens with 'Add a song to a section', a specific verb and resource that clearly differentiates from siblings like remove_song_from_section or move_song. It further scopes the operation by requiring a song from vibo_search_songs, making the tool's role unambiguous.

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?

It explains when to use the tool (after searching songs) and provides guidance on checking quality.confidence before adding. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for excluded cases, but it instructs the agent to report matches back rather than add a best guess, which is clear behavioral guidance.

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