vibo_get_section_songs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds useful details about the response content (who added, like counts, flags, comments, streaming links) and sorting options. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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-loaded with the core function and key details, with zero waste.

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 read-only list tool with a schema, the description covers the main return fields and sorting, and the schema handles paging parameters. It mentions the source of sectionId, adding useful context, though it doesn't explicitly state required parameters.

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 67%, and the description adds meaning to otherwise undocumented parameters: 'must-play / do-not-play flags' maps to isMustPlay/isFlagged, and 'Sort by likesCount, createdAt, or title' maps to sortField. It doesn't cover skip/limit, but those are already described in 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 clearly states the tool lists songs requested in a section, with specific fields (who added, likes, flags, comments, streaming links) and sort options. This distinguishes it from siblings like vibo_search_songs and vibo_list_sections.

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 implies when to use it by describing the returned data and noting that sectionId comes from vibo_list_sections, giving a workflow hint. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for basic use.

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