List playlists

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields (id, name, timestamps), the tenant scoping, and the current version limitation (item-level CRUD lands in v0.2.0). While it doesn't mention pagination or error behavior, for a zero-parameter list operation this is solid coverage.

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 lead-in ('List the playlists in the calling tenant') and labeled sections ('When to use', 'When NOT to use', 'What to know'). Every sentence adds value, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides everything needed: a clear verb+resource, usage and exclusion guidance, return contents, and a version caveat. The context from sibling tools and the empty schema are complemented by the description's thoroughness.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter information to add beyond the schema. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately avoids inventing parameters or discussing parameter formats.

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 states a specific action ('List the playlists') on a specific resource ('in the calling tenant') and immediately distinguishes itself from related tools like get_playlist and list_players. It explicitly frames the purpose as surfacing playlist names and ids for assigning to a player, which leaves no ambiguity.

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?

There is an explicit 'When to use' section (e.g., before assigning a playlist to a player via update_player) and a 'When NOT to use' section that references get_playlist for inspecting items. This clearly directs the agent to the correct tool for different tasks.

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