vibo_list_song_ideas_songs

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'List' action aligns with this. The description adds value beyond annotations by disclosing the exact return fields (songUrl/viboSongId/title/artist) and their downstream purpose. No contradictions or hidden behaviors.

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?

A single, focused sentence that leads with the action and object, then efficiently adds the return field details in a parenthetical. No wasted words.

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 listing tool with well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it states the scope, lists the key return fields, and gives a downstream usage hint. The only minor gap is the absence of explicit pagination behavior, though skip/limit are described in the schema.

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 has 100% description coverage, with all parameters individually documented. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and clearly identifies the resource ('suggested songs inside a song-idea collection'). It also specifies the returned fields, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like vibo_list_section_song_ideas that list collections rather than songs.

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?

Usage context is implied through the schema reference (songIdeasId from vibo_list_section_song_ideas) and the chaining hint ('to pass to vibo_add_song_to_section'), but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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