get_artist_releases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. The description only states a read operation ('Get'). It does not mention pagination behavior, error handling, rate limits, or what happens when the artist_id is invalid. Missing information on sorting, ordering, and output format reduces transparency.

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 extremely concise (one sentence), but this comes at the cost of completeness. While brevity is good, the description is underspecified for a tool with 5 parameters. It is not a model of conciseness because it omits essential information.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and multiple siblings, the description is incomplete. It does not cover pagination, sorting, or the meaning of parameters. The agent has insufficient context to correctly invoke the tool, especially without parameter documentation.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the parameters. It does not explain what artist_id refers to (e.g., Discogs artist ID), nor does it clarify the pagination and sorting parameters beyond their schema types. The description fails to compensate for the lack of parameter descriptions 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 'Get an artist's releases' is a clear verb+resource, but it is vague and does not distinguish from sibling tools like get_label_releases or get_release. Given the large set of siblings with overlapping functionality, a more specific description (e.g., 'Get an artist's discography with pagination and sorting') would be needed to clarify the scope.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description gives no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_label_releases or search. It also does not mention any prerequisites or limitations, leaving the agent without guidance on selection.

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