Save playlist

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it specifies that the screen list is completely replaced, and that an empty screen_ids list clears the playlist. This clarifies the tool's effect. It stops short of describing return values or error behavior, but the annotations already cover the destructive nature, so this is reasonably transparent.

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 two sentences and 35 words. It front-loads the action, then explains selection and special behavior. Every sentence adds meaningful value with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description covers the core behavior (create/replace, selection, clearing) but is incomplete for a tool with no output schema and moderate complexity. It fails to explain the label and mode parameters, and does not describe the return value or error scenarios. It is sufficient for basic usage but leaves gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool.

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?

With no schema descriptions, the description must explain parameters. It explains screen_ids (empty list clears), playlist_id (selection), and name (selection), but omits label and mode entirely. The meaning of label and the mode enum (automatic/manual) remain unclear, leaving two of five parameters unexplained.

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 tool's function: 'Create a playlist or replace an existing playlist's complete ordered screen list.' This specifies the verb (create/replace), the resource (playlist), and the exact operation (managing its ordered screen list), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that list, read, or assign playlists.

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 clear context on when to use the tool (create or replace a playlist) and explains selection logic ('by playlist_id, or by exact name'). However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it lacks the full 'when-not' guidance of a 5.

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