Check whether a laut.fm station is active and currently playing on its streaming server by providing the station ID.
Check if a station is active and playing on a streaming server
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| station_id | Yes | The station ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. 'Check' implies a read-only operation and it states the predicate being evaluated, but it does not describe return values, permissions, error behavior, or whether the check is real-time or cached.
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, well-formed sentence that front-loads the operation and resource with zero filler. Every word contributes to clarifying the tool's scope.
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 tool with one fully documented parameter, the description is adequate for invocation. However, since there is no output schema and no annotations, it leaves the return format and any auth or side-effect details unspecified.
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 100%, so the single station_id parameter is fully documented in the schema as 'The station ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline for high coverage.
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 ('Check') and resource ('station') and specifies the condition being checked ('active and playing on a streaming server'). It distinguishes itself from the generic get_station by focusing on playback state, though it never names sibling tools explicitly.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_station, get_server_status, or get_listener_stats. Usage is only implied by the purpose statement, with no conditions or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.