Get playlist

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the difference in response with include_items=true vs. without, and the polymorphic item shapes depending on content type. It could add error-handling or missing-playlist behavior, but the disclosed details are valuable and non-obvious.

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 well-structured with clear sections: a one-sentence summary, usage contexts, exclusions, and behavioral notes. Every sentence adds value; there is no fluff or repetition, and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description is quite complete: it explains the optional param's effect on the returned shape and warns about item type variance. It could mention what happens when include_items is omitted or how a missing playlist is handled, but these are minor gaps for a low-complexity read operation.

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 coverage is 50% (only include_items has a description). The description clarifies include_items by explaining the exact response difference, going beyond the schema's vague 'Inline the playlist items in the response.' It also implicitly reinforces playlist_id as the identifier despite the schema lacking a description for that field.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Fetch a single playlist by id, optionally with its content items inline.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_playlists, which lists all playlists, and from item manipulation tools.

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 explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, naming the alternative list_playlists for simple name/id lookups. It also gives concrete use cases like inspecting queued items or obtaining item ids before reordering.

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