lastfm_get_album_info

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds value by specifying the types of data returned (tracklist, tags, listener stats, wiki summary), which is behaviorally informative beyond the 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 composed of two short, informative sentences. It is front-loaded, concise, and contains no redundant or superfluous wording.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks contextual hints about parameter usage (e.g., exact match requirement) and does not mention that the tool is network-bound (implicit from Last.fm). Adequate but could be more helpful.

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%, with only minimal 'Album name' and 'Artist name' descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter-level context, such as format requirements or hints about case sensitivity. This is a critical gap.

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 explicitly states 'Get detailed information about an album' and lists specific return types (tracklist, tags, listener stats, wiki summary), making the tool's purpose very clear and distinguishing it from siblings like lastfm_get_track_info or lastfm_search_album.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., lastfm_search_album for finding album IDs, or other album-related tools). There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or context-specific recommendations.

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