get_playlist

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states that the tool gets metadata and songs, omitting important behavioral details such as the limit parameter's effect, pagination, authentication requirements, or error handling. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety context.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary elaboration.

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 simple read-only tool, the description covers the essential purpose and identifier. However, it lacks details about the limit parameter's behavior, pagination, and possible prerequisites or alternative tools. Given no annotations or output schema, this is minimally adequate but not complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains playlist_id implicitly via 'identificador' but does not mention the limit parameter at all. The limit parameter (with default 100) is left undocumented, leaving the agent without guidance on how to control the number of songs returned.

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 verb 'Obtiene' (gets) and the resource 'metadatos y canciones de una playlist' (metadata and songs of a playlist), with the key identifier 'por su identificador' (by its identifier). This precisely distinguishes it from sibling tools that list playlists or search music.

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 implies the tool is for use when you have a playlist identifier, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternative tools (e.g., search_music for finding playlists), so it falls short of a perfect score.

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