vibo_update_song

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

The description adds meaningful behavior beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation: it discloses the confirm-gating mechanism and that a preview is returned when confirm is not true. It also clarifies that at least one field must be provided. No contradiction with 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 tight sentences: the first identifies the action and supported operations, the second covers essential constraints (at least one field, confirm-gating). No unnecessary 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?

The tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and moderate complexity. The description adequately covers purpose, key constraints, and confirmation behavior, but it does not mention whether isMustPlay and isFlagged can be set together or what the preview shows. These gaps are minor given the schema and annotations.

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 71%, leaving isMustPlay and comment without descriptions. The tool description fills this gap by mapping these fields to 'mark must-play' and 'set a comment', and by explaining the confirm parameter's role via 'Confirm-gated'. This adds value beyond 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 updates songs in a section and lists the exact operations: mark must-play, flag as do-not-play, and set a comment. This specific verb+resource combination differentiates it from sibling tools like vibo_comment_on_song or vibo_toggle_song_like.

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 gives clear context (updating songs in a section) and states the 'Provide at least one field' and 'Confirm-gated' requirements. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or say when to use this tool instead of related tools, so usage guidance relies on implication.

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