vibo_get_playlists

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

The annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds the important auth/connection prerequisite: the source must already be connected, with a reference to vibo_get_me. This is useful beyond the annotation, though it doesn't describe return shape or rate-limit/paging behavior.

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?

Two sentences, no filler, and the core list action plus source scope are front-loaded. The clause about importing songs earns its place by signaling downstream use, and the prerequisite reference adds value without bloating.

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 read-only list tool with fully described parameters, the prerequisites, source enum, and purpose are covered. There is no output schema, and the description could more explicitly state what fields the agent will need from returned playlists for import, but the core information needed to call it correctly is present.

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 source connectivity and names 'Spotify or Apple Music', but it does not add materially new parameter meaning beyond what the schema already documents for q, skip, limit, and source.

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 the specific verb 'List', the resource 'your playlists', and the scoped context 'from a connected streaming service (Spotify or Apple Music)'. This clearly separates it from siblings like vibo_get_playlist_songs, which targets songs within a playlist, and from import/export tools.

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 gives clear usage context by stating the purpose ('so you can import songs from them') and the key prerequisite ('Requires that source to be connected'). It points to vibo_get_me for verification, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives or exclude cases.

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