vibo_comment_on_song

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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint: false, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It adds that comments are directed 'for the DJ' and that the operation is 'Confirm-gated,' which implies a preview-then-confirm flow. This meaningfully supplements the 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 two short sentences, front-loading the action and then adding the key confirmation trait. Every word earns its place with 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?

With 5 parameters, 4 required, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose and the critical confirm-gating behavior. The schema handles parameter details. A minor gap is not describing what the preview returns, but the schema mentions a preview, so this is acceptable.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-level details beyond the schema; it only hints at the confirm parameter via 'Confirm-gated,' but the schema already explains that behavior more fully.

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 explicitly states the action: 'Leave a comment / note for the DJ on a specific song.' This uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'on a specific song' distinguishes it from the sibling vibo_comment_on_section.

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 specifying the target is a specific song, which implicitly differentiates it from section comments. It also mentions 'Confirm-gated,' indicating the tool requires a confirmation step. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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