vibo_list_section_song_ideas

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's claim that it lists data is consistent. It adds context about the return fields and the need for sectionId, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 main purpose and is reasonably concise. It includes a useful workflow in the same sentence, but could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

Given the absence of an output schema, the description compensates by listing the return fields (title, songsCount, _id) and provides a complete workflow linking to sibling tools. It covers the essential context for an agent.

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%, and all parameters are described in the schema. The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond mentioning that sectionId comes from vibo_list_sections, which is a minor cross-reference.

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 lists the DJ's suggested song-idea collections for a section, specifying the returned fields (title, songsCount, _id). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing vibo_list_song_ideas_songs and vibo_add_song_to_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 a clear workflow: list ideas, then use _id with vibo_list_song_ideas_songs to see songs, then add liked ones with vibo_add_song_to_section. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool.

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